Re: WAL Record Header Size Reduction

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WAL Record Header Size Reduction
Date: 2007-01-25 16:03:13
Message-ID: 19954.1169740993@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> ISTM that we would get the effect your looking for by just moving the
> xl_tot_len field to the end, and only storing it for records with backup
> blocks:

I like that formulation better --- seems like less
change-for-the-sake-of-change.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2007-01-25 16:04:49 Re: [HACKERS] how to plan for vacuum?
Previous Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2007-01-25 16:02:03 Re: Access last inserted tuple info...