Re: CHECKPOINT unlogged data

From: Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CHECKPOINT unlogged data
Date: 2025-05-30 17:23:04
Message-ID: aDnpeJ99HhoMgJ40@msg.df7cb.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Re: Nathan Bossart
> This patch also adds an IMMEDIATE option, which I proposed some time ago
> [0]. I ended up withdrawing it due to general skepticism about its

Thanks for the pointer, I did not go that far back when looking for
older threads.

When writing the patch, I was also thinking about naming the option
"fast" or "spread" but ultimately went with "immediate" because that's
what the log message is using:

=# checkpoint;
2025-05-30 18:23:17.433 CEST [579834] LOG: Checkpoint beginnt: immediate force wait

SQL command "(options)" tend to be booleans, hence "immediate {on|off}".
Introducing two separate keywords "fast" and "spread" seemed
confusing, and there is no precedent for "fast=on" in other tools or
the replication protocol.

> usefulness. FWIW I have no concerns about adding a few retail options to
> CHECKPOINT, but others might balk at options without solid use-cases. The
> unlogged table one seems reasonable enough.

I think the two options immediate and flush_all are actually useful in
combination for the shutdown case. If operation is to continue
normally until just before the shutdown, it might make sense to run
these 3 commands (or just #1 and #3):

checkpoint (flush_all, immediate false);
checkpoint (flush_all);
pg_ctl stop

(I also thought about a VERBOSE option, but since the checkpoint
messages are generated by a different process, it's probably harder
than I initially thought.)

Christoph

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2025-05-30 17:29:08 Re: CHECKPOINT unlogged data
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2025-05-30 17:07:48 Re: CHECKPOINT unlogged data