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

Re: Escaping the ARC patent

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>,pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Escaping the ARC patent
Date: 2005-02-04 22:02:07
Message-ID: 17784.1107554527@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
"Jim C. Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org> writes:
> I think it would be useful to have a means to adjust the queue sizes
> dynamically from a database connection. If the optimum queue sizes
> depend on the workload this would allow things like batch processes to
> tweak the queue sizes for better performance when they're running.

That strikes me as a bad idea --- what will cause the queue size to
revert to normal, if the batch process fails before resetting it?

In any case, the only mechanism we have available for such things is
modifying postgresql.conf and then SIGHUPping the postmaster; there is
no other way to adjust a parameter that all backends must see as having
the same value.  So even if we invent a GUC parameter for this, it's not
going to be something your batch process can lightly fool around with.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: pgsqlDate: 2005-02-04 22:10:18
Subject: Query optimizer 8.0.1 (and 8.0)
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-04 21:41:51
Subject: Re: libpq API incompatibility between 7.4 and 8.0

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