Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maciek Sakrejda <m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints
Date: 2022-08-12 13:03:15
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYf-oueXq2kr+z4Kb3XKrv8Y7yRmPNFg7C7aXxLqi_5zg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 2:15 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> As far as I know, this 0001 addresses all outstanding comments and
> fixes the reported bug.
>
> Does anyone think otherwise?

If they do, they're keeping quiet, so I committed this and
back-patched it to v15.

Regarding 0002 -- should it, perhaps, use PGAlignedBlock?

Although 0002 is formally a performance optimization, I'm inclined to
think that if we're going to commit it, it should also be back-patched
into v15, because letting the code diverge when we're not even out of
beta yet seems painful.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2022-08-12 13:14:12 Re: doc: Clarify Routines and Extension Membership
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2022-08-12 12:48:33 Re: Proposal to provide the facility to set binary format output for specific OID's per session