"Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> We could just allow any value up to 1.0, and note in the docs that you should
> leave some headroom, unless you don't mind starting the next checkpoint a bit
> late. That actually sounds pretty good.
What exactly happens if a checkpoint takes so long that the next checkpoint
starts. Aside from it not actually helping is there much reason to avoid this
situation? Have we ever actually tested it?
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2007-06-26 20:00:54|
|Subject: Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints, final patch|
|Previous:||From: Dave Page||Date: 2007-06-26 19:39:38|
|Subject: pg_ctl -w (wait) option on Windows|