Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: COMMIT NOWAIT Performance Option
Date: 2007-02-28 22:36:38
Message-ID: 1172702198.13722.79.camel@dogma.v10.wvs
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2007-02-28 at 21:13 +0000, Gregory Stark wrote:
> Hm that's an interesting thought. We only really have to check pages that
> would have received a full page write since the last checkpoint. So if we made

Do we ever do a partial page write, or is what you're saying equivalent
to "we only have to check pages that have been written to since the last
checkpoint"?

And if it is the same, can't we get the pages that were written to from
the ctids in the wal records?

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joachim Wieland 2007-02-28 22:48:38 Re: SOC & user quotas
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-02-28 22:31:48 Re: Possible Bug: high CPU usage for stats collector in 8.2