Re: pg_prewarm

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_prewarm
Date: 2012-07-10 16:59:50
Message-ID: 4FFC5F86.3090704@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 7/10/12 5:22 AM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I think we want this. There is some discussion about how much overlap
>> it has with pgfincore, but I don't think there is an active proposal
>> to put that into contrib, so don't see that as blocking this.
>
> It is my understanding that Cédric wants to propose a patch for
> pgfincore as a contrib module in next Commit Fest, and has already been
> working on some necessary cleaning to see that happen.

Still means "not a blocker" in my book.

pgFincore, great as it is:

a) might not be ready for contrib in 9.2
b) isn't supported on all platforms
c) isn't necessarily safe in production (I've crashed Linux with Fincore
in the recent past).

As such, I see no reason why pgprewarm and pgfincore in contrib should
block each other, either way.

--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2012-07-10 17:03:06 Re: several problems in pg_receivexlog
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2012-07-10 16:59:18 Re: Using pg_upgrade on log-shipping standby servers