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

Re: [HACKERS] Bgwriter behavior

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>,Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bgwriter behavior
Date: 2005-01-03 20:29:36
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> OK, we have a submitted patch that attempts to improve bgwriter by
> making bgwriter_percent control what percentage of the buffer is
> scanned.

> The patch still needs doc changes and a change to the default value but
> at this point we need a vote on the patch.  Is it:

> 	* too late for 8.0
> 	* not the right improvement
> 	* to be applied with doc/default additions

My vote: too late for 8.0.  There is no hard evidence that this is a
useful improvement, and no time for such evidence to be obtained.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2005-01-03 20:32:28
Subject: possible bug in case comparison on index scan.
Previous:From: Tzahi FadidaDate: 2005-01-03 20:20:33
Subject: Implementing and Experimenting with a Full Disjunctions Operator.

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2005-01-03 20:52:00
Subject: ipcrm or ipcclean hint
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2005-01-03 20:09:53
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Bgwriter behavior

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