| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18 |
| Date: | 2016-03-10 22:33:33 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobLabMYPb+yjm4Y8jOdiFT-D4at=0fEJoH49L0Wesjm-g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2016-02-21 09:49:53 +0530, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I think there might be a semantic distinction between these two terms.
>> Doesn't writeback mean writing pages to disk, and flushing mean making
>> sure that they are durably on disk? So for example when the Linux
>> kernel thinks there is too much dirty data, it initiates writeback,
>> not a flush; on the other hand, at transaction commit, we initiate a
>> flush, not writeback.
>
> I don't think terminology is sufficiently clear to make such a
> distinction. Take e.g. our FlushBuffer()...
Well then we should clarify it!
:-)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-03-10 22:38:13 | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18 |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2016-03-10 22:24:41 | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18 |