|From:||Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>|
|To:||Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: optimizing CleanupTempFiles|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email|
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 10:19 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > An unfortunate choice of words! Harmless is not how your average DBA
> > would describe it when their disk fills and they are apparently unable
> > to reduce space consumption. So there is still a problem there even if
> > we fix the temp files portion of it.
> The files *are* truncated to zero bytes immediately. They're left
> hanging as empty files until next checkpoint.
Ah, cool. So won't actually unlinking temp files be slower than just
leaving them for checkpointer to clear up offline? i.e. do we really
need the patch you just posted?
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
|Next Message||Simon Riggs||2008-09-18 08:05:45||Re: [PATCHES] Infrastructure changes for recovery|
|Previous Message||Heikki Linnakangas||2008-09-18 07:19:02||Re: optimizing CleanupTempFiles|