Re: Reducing power consumption on idle servers

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reducing power consumption on idle servers
Date: 2022-02-26 17:14:56
Message-ID: CABUevEyRzcq4tFDHzsMZ-x2prH_7-qGC8LuA_ZtA90GY3Ot+gQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 5:11 PM Simon Riggs
<simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 at 17:03, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2022-02-19 14:10:39 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > IMO we should instead consider either deprecating file based promotion, or
> > adding an optional dependency on filesystem monitoring APIs (i.e. inotify etc)
> > that avoid the need to poll for file creation.

Came here to suggest exactly that :)

> Deprecating explicit file-based promotion is possible and simple, so
> that is the approach in the latest version of the patch.

Is there any actual use-case for this other than backwards
compatibility? The alternative has certainly been around for some time
now, so if we don't know a specific use-case for the file-based one
it's definitely time to deprecate it properly.

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2022-02-26 17:44:09 Re: Reducing power consumption on idle servers
Previous Message Shay Rojansky 2022-02-26 16:51:25 Re: Document ordering guarantees on INSERT/UPDATE RETURNING clause