| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Takashi Menjo <menjo(dot)takashi(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, 'Heikki Linnakangas' <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | 'Andres Freund' <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, 'Michael Paquier' <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, 'Dmitry Dolgov' <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, ishizaki(dot)teruaki(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp, ichiyanagi(dot)yoshimi(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistent memory |
| Date: | 2019-01-25 11:55:15 |
| Message-ID: | a8ab2ad1-8de5-7e12-9205-1e108f388d8f@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 25/01/2019 09:52, Takashi Menjo wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> To re-iterate what I said earlier in this thread, I think the next step
>> here is to write a patch that modifies xlog.c to use plain old
>> mmap()/msync() to memory-map the WAL files, to replace the WAL buffers.
> Sorry but my new patchset still uses PMDK, because PMDK is supported on
> Linux
> _and Windows_, and I think someone may want to test this patchset on
> Windows...
When you manage the WAL (or perhaps in the future relation files)
through PMDK, is there still a file system view of it somewhere, for
browsing, debugging, and for monitoring tools?
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-01-25 12:00:55 | Re: pg_upgrade: Pass -j down to vacuumdb |
| Previous Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2019-01-25 11:33:07 | postgres_fdw: estimate_path_cost_size fails to re-use cached costs |