Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
Cc: Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Date: 2005-06-29 22:41:19
Message-ID: 29655.1120084879@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> Ok, finally managed though the peristent efforts of Mark Wong to get some
> tests through. Here are two tests with the CRC and wall buffer checking
> completely cut out of the code, as Tom suggested:

Uh, what exactly did you cut out? I suggested dropping the dumping of
full page images, but not removing CRCs altogether ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-06-29 23:00:04 Re: [HACKERS] Dbsize backend integration
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-06-29 22:34:42 Re: problem with plpgsql