| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers ML <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Keeping separate WAL segments for each database |
| Date: | 2010-07-03 14:46:30 |
| Message-ID: | 1278168390.4151.7979.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 22:21 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> What about having a single WAL stream for all commit records (thereby
> avoiding any possible xact-serialization funnies) and other WAL
> records
> divided up among multiple streams in some fashion or other? A commit
> record would bear minimum-LSN pointers for all the streams that its
> transaction had written to. Things like HEAP_CLEAN records would bear
> minimum-LSN pointers for the commit stream. Workable?
I'm interested in the idea of putting full page writes into one stream
and all other WAL records into another.
That would allow us to stream less data for log shipping.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-07-03 15:32:09 | Re: Keepalive for max_standby_delay |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-07-03 14:38:37 | Re: nvarchar notation accepted? |