Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: New XLOG record indicating WAL-skipping

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New XLOG record indicating WAL-skipping
Date: 2010-01-18 08:56:56
Message-ID: 1263805016.3642.1575.camel@ebony (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 13:28 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I think it's a premature optimization to skip writing the records if
> we've written in the same session already. Especially with the
> 'reason'
> information added to the records, it's nice to have a record of each
> such operation. All operations that skip WAL-logging are heavy enough
> that an additional WAL record will make no difference. I can see that
> it
> was required to avoid the flooding from heap_insert(), but we can move
> the XLogSkipLogging() call from heap_insert() to heap_sync().

Can we call that XLogReportUnloggedStatement() or similar?
XlogSkipLogging() sounds like a request rather than a mark/report/record
type of action.

> Attached is an updated patch, doing the above. Am I missing anything?

Sounds OK and works with Hot Standby.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Takahiro ItagakiDate: 2010-01-18 09:13:11
Subject: Re: [SPAM]Mammoth in Core?
Previous:From: Takahiro ItagakiDate: 2010-01-18 08:55:52
Subject: Re: Partitioning syntax

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group