| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reducing size of WAL record headers |
| Date: | 2013-01-09 21:15:16 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKF96EONecEj20M5buYk2-O0sc8H2wXcLbJytj=o3B=7w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9 January 2013 21:02, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> wrote:
>> OK, crazy idea, but can we just record xl_len as a difference against
>> xl_tot_len, and shorten the xl_len field?
>
>
> Hmm, so it would essentially be the length of all the backup blocks. perhaps
> rename it to xl_bkpblk_len.
>
> However, that would cap the total size of backup blocks to 64k. Which would
> not be enough with 32k BLCKSZ.
Since that requires a recompile anyway, why not make XLogRecord
smaller only for 16k BLCKSZ or less?
Problem if we do that is that xl_len is used extensively in _redo
routines, so its a much more invasive patch.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-01-09 21:17:25 | Re: Reducing size of WAL record headers |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-01-09 21:12:40 | Re: PL/perl should fail on configure, not make |