Re: [HACKERS] "distributed checkpoint"

[Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>]

Greg Smith wrote:

> It's good this came up, because that is factually wrong; while the average 
> case is much better some OS-dependant aspects of the spike (what happens at 
> fsync) are certainly still there.  I think it's easier to rewrite this 
> whole thing so it's technically accurate rather than a simple fix of the 
> wording, something like this:
>
> "Checkpoint writes can be spread over a longer time period to smooth the 
> I/O spike during each checkpoint"

Thanks, I changed it to this.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                        http://www.advogato.org/person/alvherre
"No necesitamos banderas
 No reconocemos fronteras"                  (Jorge González)