From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Too frequent checkpoints ? |
Date: | 2013-02-14 18:18:57 |
Message-ID: | CAHGQGwFVjjfzSgmttziNPSRYv76zgoh8D18tc6KMWbhSaVBWNA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Pavan Deolasee
<pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> .>
>> BTW, the cause of the problem is that the following sequences happens.
>>
>> 1. archive_timeout switches WAL file because checkpoint WAL record has
>> has been written since last switch
>
> Thank you for explaining that. I also noticed that the WAL file switch
> happens after archive_timeout seconds irrespective of whether
> archive_mode is turned ON or not. This happens because we don't check
> if XLogArchivingActive() in CheckArchiveTimeout() function. It looks
> wrong to me.
+1 to fix this. I've not heard the use case where archive_timeout needs to
be used even in not archive mode...
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2013-02-14 19:01:53 | Re: [RFC] ideas for a new Python DBAPI driver (was Re: libpq test suite) |
Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-02-14 18:02:13 | Call for Google Summer of Code mentors, admins |