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

Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Revert "commit_delay" change; just add comment that we don't hav

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Revert "commit_delay" change; just add comment that we don't hav
Date: 2012-08-15 04:15:22
Message-ID: 8935.1345004122@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committerspgsql-hackers
Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 14 August 2012 21:26, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> Revert "commit_delay" change; just add comment that we don't have
>> a microsecond specification.

> I think that if we eventually decide to change the name of
> commit_delay for 9.3 (you previously suggested that that might be
> revisited), it will be reasonable to have the new GUC in units of
> milliseconds.

Well, the reason why it's like that at all is the thought that values
of less than 1 millisecond might be useful.  Are we prepared to suppose
that that is not and never will be true?

			regards, tom lane


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Pavel StehuleDate: 2012-08-15 04:15:58
Subject: Re: betatesting: ERROR: failed to build any 2-way joins on 9.2
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-08-15 04:11:47
Subject: Re: betatesting: ERROR: failed to build any 2-way joins on 9.2

pgsql-committers by date

Next:From: Peter GeogheganDate: 2012-08-15 10:51:54
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Revert "commit_delay" change; just add comment that we don't hav
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2012-08-15 04:08:58
Subject: pgsql: Resurrect the "last ditch" code path injoin_search_one_level().

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