| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three |
| Date: | 2010-11-30 16:22:03 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTi=7St=B=MONtpwD7eTQe9o2Vzd2j5Vfs0wnmj0b@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> How much is "quite a lot"? Do we have any real reason to think that
> this solution is unacceptable performance-wise?
Well, let's imagine a 1GB insert-only table. It has 128K pages. If
you XLOG setting the bit on each page, you'll need to write 128K WAL
records, each containing a 12-byte relfilenode and a 4-byte block
offset, for a total of 16 bytes of WAL per page, thus 2MB of WAL.
But you did just dirty a gigabyte of data.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-11-30 16:25:19 | Re: [GENERAL] column-level update privs + lock table |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-30 16:16:33 | Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three |