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

Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers ML <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database
Date: 2010-07-03 14:46:30
Message-ID: 1278168390.4151.7979.camel@ebony (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 22:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> What about having a single WAL stream for all commit records (thereby
> avoiding any possible xact-serialization funnies) and other WAL
> records
> divided up among multiple streams in some fashion or other?  A commit
> record would bear minimum-LSN pointers for all the streams that its
> transaction had written to.  Things like HEAP_CLEAN records would bear
> minimum-LSN pointers for the commit stream.  Workable?

I'm interested in the idea of putting full page writes into one stream
and all other WAL records into another.

That would allow us to stream less data for log shipping.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-07-03 15:32:09
Subject: Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-07-03 14:38:37
Subject: Re: nvarchar notation accepted?

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