| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Draft release notes complete |
| Date: | 2012-05-10 12:25:54 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nML7tYzQ=jgLe71tv=RwB9EMqdN4Ab8g+Q0ea4FZL4KX7A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10 May 2012 13:11, Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Why can't we call group commit group commit (and for that matter,
> index-only scans index-only scans), so that people will understand
> that we are now competitive with other RDBMSs in this area? "Improve
> performance of WAL writes when multiple transactions commit at the
> same time" seems like a pretty bad description, since it doesn't make
> any reference to batching of commits. Also, I don't think that the
> placement of this as the second to last performance feature is
> commensurate with its actual importance.
Agreed.
Group Commit is a recognised term and also one where other DBMS, e.g.
Marea have included that feature recently.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vik Reykja | 2012-05-10 12:28:39 | Re: Draft release notes complete |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2012-05-10 12:24:11 | Re: Draft release notes complete |