Re: New statistics for WAL buffer dirty writes

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Satoshi Nagayasu <snaga(at)uptime(dot)jp>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tv(at)fuzzy(dot)cz>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Subject: Re: New statistics for WAL buffer dirty writes
Date: 2013-09-10 01:27:56
Message-ID: CAM3SWZTFSPxQFi8Gjz1xV7Ur9jhFcn5hZpdfbOomvRXKSawj6w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> It is automated.

Oh, yeah. I see that the maintainer-check target does that. I should
probably get into the habit of using targets other than
check/installcheck, as you recently demonstrated.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2013-09-10 01:29:07 Re: proposal: Set effective_cache_size to greater of .conf value, shared_buffers
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2013-09-10 01:25:00 Re: psql: small patch to correct filename formatting error in '\s FILE' output