| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, 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>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |
| Date: | 2022-08-05 02:27:20 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZKh8Ab-V5a7i0wPK8DyOEUX8RpKfG9y2YYW86mO943Rw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 4, 2022 at 7:11 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> [pile^2] Also, what is the rationale for locking the target buffer
> but not the source buffer? That seems pretty hard to justify from
> here, even granting the assumption that we don't expect any other
> processes to be interested in these buffers (which I don't grant,
> because checkpointer).
Ooph. I agree.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2022-08-05 02:49:16 | Re: An attempt to avoid locally-committed-but-not-replicated-to-standby-transactions in synchronous replication |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-08-05 02:26:31 | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |