Re: AW: AW: AW: WAL does not recover gracefully from ou t-of -dis k-sp ace

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>
Cc: "'Zeugswetter Andreas SB'" <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: AW: AW: AW: WAL does not recover gracefully from ou t-of -dis k-sp ace
Date: 2001-03-13 00:15:32
Message-ID: 7901.984442532@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> writes:
> Probably we should update XLogWrite to write() more than 1 block,
> but Tom should apply his patches first (btw, did you implement
> "log file size" condition for checkpoints, Tom?).

Yes I did. There's a variable now to specify a checkpoint every N
log segments --- I figured that was good enough resolution, and it
allowed the test to be made only when we're rolling over to a new
segment, so it's not in a time-critical path.

If you're happy with what I did so far, I'll go ahead and commit.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-03-13 00:20:41 Re: xlog patches reviewed
Previous Message Mikheev, Vadim 2001-03-13 00:02:49 RE: AW: AW: AW: WAL does not recover gracefully from ou t-of -dis k-sp ace