Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jakub Wartak <Jakub(dot)Wartak(at)tomtom(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Date: 2021-12-29 19:41:42
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2021-12-29 17:29:52 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > FWIW I don't think we include updates to typedefs.list in patches.
> Seems pretty harmless? And useful to keep around in development
> branches because I like to pgindent stuff...

I think it's even helpful. As long as it's done with a bit of manual
oversight, I don't see a meaningful downside of doing so. One needs to be
careful to not remove platform dependant typedefs, but that's it. And
especially for long-lived feature branches it's much less work to keep the
typedefs.list changes in the tree, rather than coming up with them locally
over and over / across multiple people working on a branch.


Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2021-12-29 20:17:37 Re: Adding CI to our tree
Previous Message Andres Freund 2021-12-29 19:39:31 Re: Throttling WAL inserts when the standby falls behind more than the configured replica_lag_in_bytes