| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix DROP TABLESPACE on Windows with ProcSignalBarrier? |
| Date: | 2021-03-04 22:08:22 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGLXWk-Ok0NoemDi8es+aeyMHHk4qw1R-764cEJmHJE61A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 4, 2021 at 11:54 AM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I've been wondering what obscure hazards these "tombstone" (for want
> > of a better word) files guard against, besides the one described in
> > the comments for mdunlink(). I've been thinking about various
> > schemes that can be summarised as "put the tombstones somewhere else",
> > but first... this is probably a stupid question, but what would break
> > if we just ... turned all this stuff off when wal_level is high enough
> > (as it is by default)?
The "how-to-make-it-so-that-we-don't-need-a-checkpoint" subtopic is
hereby ejected from this thead, and moved over here:
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/33/3030/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2021-03-04 22:16:04 | Re: PoC/WIP: Extended statistics on expressions |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-03-04 22:04:37 | Re: pg_amcheck contrib application |