| From: | Shawn Debnath <sdn(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue |
| Date: | 2019-03-01 20:35:33 |
| Message-ID: | 20190301203533.GB4664@f01898859afd.ant.amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 03:03:19PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 2:36 PM Shawn Debnath <sdn(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> > I disagree, at least with combining and retaining enums. Encoding all
> > the possible request types with the current, planned and future SMGRs
> > would cause a sheer explosion in the number of enum values.
>
> How big of an explosion would it be?
4 enum values x # of smgrs; currently md, soon undo and slru so 12 in
total. Any future smgr addition will expand this further.
--
Shawn Debnath
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2019-03-01 20:41:41 | Re: Refactoring the checkpointer's fsync request queue |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-03-01 20:27:36 | Re: [Proposal] Table-level Transparent Data Encryption (TDE) and Key Management Service (KMS) |