From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: New XLOG record indicating WAL-skipping |
Date: | 2010-01-18 08:56:56 |
Message-ID: | 1263805016.3642.1575.camel@ebony |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 2010-01-15 at 13:28 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I think it's a premature optimization to skip writing the records if
> we've written in the same session already. Especially with the
> 'reason'
> information added to the records, it's nice to have a record of each
> such operation. All operations that skip WAL-logging are heavy enough
> that an additional WAL record will make no difference. I can see that
> it
> was required to avoid the flooding from heap_insert(), but we can move
> the XLogSkipLogging() call from heap_insert() to heap_sync().
Can we call that XLogReportUnloggedStatement() or similar?
XlogSkipLogging() sounds like a request rather than a mark/report/record
type of action.
> Attached is an updated patch, doing the above. Am I missing anything?
Sounds OK and works with Hot Standby.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-01-18 09:13:11 | Re: [SPAM]Mammoth in Core? |
Previous Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-01-18 08:55:52 | Re: Partitioning syntax |