| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)surnet(dot)cl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alon Goldshuv <agoldshuv(at)greenplum(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL bypass for CTAS |
| Date: | 2005-06-20 21:09:39 |
| Message-ID: | 20050620210939.GC9278@surnet.cl |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 09:55:12PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> I put those changes in mainly for COPY. If you don't make any request at
> all to FSM then a relation never gets to the MRU relation FSM list. I
> agree that it is not strictly necessary, but leaving it off would be a
> change in behaviour, since COPY did previously cause the relation to get
> to the MRU. That could be a problem, since a relation might not then be
> allocated any FSM pages following a vacuum.
Is that a problem? If the pages don't fit in FSM, then maybe the system
is misconfigured anyway. The person running the DW should just increase
the FSM settings, which is hardly a costly thing because it uses so
little memory.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]surnet.cl>)
"No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada."
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-06-20 21:19:09 | Re: WAL bypass for CTAS |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-06-20 21:04:42 | Re: pg_locks view versus prepared transactions |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-06-20 21:19:09 | Re: WAL bypass for CTAS |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-06-20 20:55:12 | Re: WAL bypass for CTAS |