| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Greg Stark <greg(dot)stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding new flags to XLogRecord |
| Date: | 2008-09-18 14:10:41 |
| Message-ID: | 1221747041.3913.2427.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 09:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> >> In some cases, but my wish is also to minimise WAL volume as much as
> >> possible.
>
> > I'm with Greg on this one: baroque bit-squeezing schemes are a bad idea.
>
> Wait a minute ... why are we even having this conversation? XLogRecord
> has at least two entirely-wasted bytes right now, due to alignment.
> It is entirely not sane to consider messing with xl_prev in preference
> to using that space.
OK, two bytes it is then.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-09-18 14:24:55 | Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-09-18 14:09:43 | Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery |