| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Russell Smith <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC |
| Date: | 2005-07-07 16:11:05 |
| Message-ID: | 200507071611.j67GB5d17982@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> >>Just to make my position perfectly clear: I don't want to see this
> >>option shipped in 8.1. It's reasonable to have it in there for now
> >>as an aid to our performance investigations, but I don't see that it
> >>has any value for production.
> >
> >
> > Well, this is the first I am hearing that, and of course your position
> > is just one vote.
>
> True but your "feature" was added after feature freeze ;). I don't see
My patch was posted days before the feature freeze.
> this as a good thing overall. We should be looking for a solution not a
> band-aid that if you tear it off will pull the skin.
Sure, having it be _like_ fsync is not a good thing. Seems we can roll
it into the fsync option, improve it, or remove it.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-07-07 16:22:48 | Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC |
| Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2005-07-07 16:07:32 | Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC |