Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock)
Date: 2012-03-21 12:27:45
Message-ID: CA+TgmoaBrDG0HzTsr38t0R067P08aYoYt87HFf8fRGj+Se7J5w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:52 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> So, although none of the issues alone is a show-stopper, but considering all
> these things together, I'm starting to feel that this needs to be pushed to
> 9.3. Thoughts?

I think I agree. I like the refactoring ideas that you're proposing,
but I don't really think we should be starting on that in mid-March.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-03-21 13:26:58 Re: Memory usage during sorting
Previous Message Robert Haas 2012-03-21 12:24:58 Re: Proposal: Create index on foreign table