Re: Is Patch Ok for deferred trigger disk queue?

Stuart wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone23(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> writes:
>>
>>>As a side question, it looks to me that the code stores the first trigger
>>>records in memory and then after some point starts storing all new records
>>>on disk. Is this correct? I'd wonder if that's really what you want in
>>>general, since I'd think that the earliest ones are the ones you're least
>>>likely to need until end of transaction (or set constraints in the fk
>>>case) whereas the most recent ones are possibly going to be immediate
>>>triggers which you're going to need as soon as the statement is done.
>>
>>
>> Good point. It would be better to push out stuff from the head of the
>> queue, hoping that stuff near the end might never need to be written
>> at all.
>>
>> regards, tom lane
> Hmmm.... I see your point. I will change the patch to write the head to
> disk and reenter when the development branch splits off.
> Also I've noticed that there is an fd.h which has file routines which I
> should be using rather than the stdio routines.
> I will also clean up those errors.

While you are still at it, can you make the arbitrarily choosen trigger
queue size a config parameter? It is much easier to do tuning without
the need to recompile the backend.

Jan

--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #