| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matthew Kirkwood <matthew(at)hairy(dot)beasts(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: A patch for xlog.c |
| Date: | 2001-02-24 22:20:06 |
| Message-ID: | 15375.983053206@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Matthew Kirkwood <matthew(at)hairy(dot)beasts(dot)org> writes:
> Forgive me if I posted it to the wrong place -- I was far from
> proposing this for inclusion.
Diffs posted to pgsql-patches are generally considered to be requests
for application of a patch. If this is only an experiment it had best
be clearly labeled as such.
> It is but a small step on the way to my plan of mmap()ifying all of
> the WAL stuff (which may also prove a waste of effort).
Very probably. What are your grounds for thinking that's a good idea?
I can't see any reason to think that mmap is more efficient than write
for simple sequential writes, which is what we need to do.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew Kirkwood | 2001-02-24 23:01:06 | Re: A patch for xlog.c |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-02-24 22:07:54 | Re: offset and limit in update and subselect |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew Kirkwood | 2001-02-24 23:01:06 | Re: A patch for xlog.c |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-02-24 21:01:15 | Re: A patch for xlog.c |