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

Re: HOT patch - version 11

From: "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: HOT patch - version 11
Date: 2007-08-07 18:01:44
Message-ID: 2e78013d0708071101g4aa0eb19we23807442098bddb@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
On 8/2/07, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> . It would also be better if we didn't emit a
> > separate WAL record for defraging a page, if we also prune it at the
> > same time. I'm not that worried about WAL usage in general, but that
> > seems simple enough to fix.
>
>
>
> Ah I see. I shall fix that.
>


When  I started making this change, I realized that we need the
second WAL record because if the block is backed up in pruning
WAL write, we may never call PageRepairFragmentation during
the redo phase. Of course, we can fix that by making
heap_xlog_clean always repair page fragmentation irrespective
of whether the block was backed up, but that doesn't seem like
a good solution.



Thanks,
Pavan



-- 
Pavan Deolasee
EnterpriseDB     http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2007-08-07 18:01:45
Subject: HOT patch, missing things
Previous:From: Decibel!Date: 2007-08-07 18:00:37
Subject: Re: HOT patch - version 13

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-08-07 18:11:03
Subject: Re: further WIP for COPYable logs
Previous:From: Pavan DeolaseeDate: 2007-08-07 12:56:48
Subject: HOT patch - version 13

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