Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Possible Bug? TEST CASE

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Francis Reader <freader(at)imerge(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: "'pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Possible Bug? TEST CASE
Date: 2002-07-16 16:37:05
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Francis Reader <freader(at)imerge(dot)co(dot)uk> writes:
> To conclude, if you have many clients whose backends have infrequent write
> accesses and then long periods of inactivity, but whose connection to the
> database is left open, and other backends that are active which march on and
> create new wal files, many "(deleted)" wal can be created which are ONLY
> cleared up, with the closing of the backend or when another write access on
> the db from that backend.

And so what?  I don't see any bad effects here (especially not in the
context of 7.2's renaming).

> As another point, is there a way to TURN OFF WAL completely????


			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Joe ConwayDate: 2002-07-16 17:00:25
Subject: Re: [BUGS] Bug #712: Documentation Section 3.4 Binary Strings
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-07-16 16:35:17
Subject: Re: drop database doesn't work

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group