From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST |
Date: | 2010-12-17 19:22:35 |
Message-ID: | 4034.1292613755@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> On 17.12.2010 21:07, Tom Lane wrote:
>> IIUC, the problem is that the bufmgr might think that a GIST NSN is an
>> LSN that should affect when to force out a dirty buffer? What if we
>> taught it the difference? We could for example dedicate a pd_flags
>> bit to marking pages whose pd_lsn isn't actually an LSN.
> I'm not very fond of expanding buffer manager's knowledge of the page
> layout. How about a new flag in the buffer desc, BM_UNLOGGED?
That could work too, if you can explain how the flag comes to be set
without a bunch of ugliness all over the system. I don't want callers
of ReadBuffer to have to supply the bit for example.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-12-17 19:23:59 | Re: proposal: FOREACH-IN-ARRAY (probably for 9.2?) |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-12-17 19:19:47 | Re: ps_status on fastpath |