| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress |
| Date: | 2016-12-21 21:44:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwaXF8rhMdqLjnWuhWXRKwxGfJTY2hhxPG973jaDsLPUOQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> That's imo pretty much what progress LSN currently describes. Have there
> been any records which are important for durability/consistency and
> hence need to be archived and such.
>
The above, to me, describes a "milestone LSN"...
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2016-12-21 21:48:09 | Re: Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2016-12-21 21:43:33 | Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress |