| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL insert delay settings |
| Date: | 2019-02-14 15:16:05 |
| Message-ID: | 0c791891-1ba0-da2e-5a70-17ec4a3678f1@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 13/02/2019 16:40, Andres Freund wrote:
> On February 13, 2019 4:39:21 PM GMT+01:00, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 13/02/2019 13:18, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> But I don't think the way you did it is acceptable - we can't just
>> delay while holding buffer locks, in critical sections, while not
>> interruptible.
>>
>> The code I added to XLogInsertRecord() is not inside the critical
>> section.
>
> Most callers do xlog insertions inside crit sections though.
Is it a problem that pg_usleep(CommitDelay) is inside a critical section?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-02-14 15:22:13 | Re: Early WIP/PoC for inlining CTEs |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-02-14 15:14:45 | Re: WAL insert delay settings |