| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing |
| Date: | 2015-06-02 12:56:11 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.10.1506021449350.17397@sto |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello Andres,
> If I see correctly you picked up the version without sorting durch
> checkpoints. I think that's not going to work - there'll be too many
> situations where the new behaviour will be detrimental. Did you
> consider combining both approaches?
Ja, I thought that it was a more complex patch with uncertain/less clear
benefits, and as this simpler version was already effective enough as it
was, so I decided to start with that and try to have reasonable proof of
benefits so that it could get through.
--
Fabien.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2015-06-02 13:15:39 | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-06-02 12:56:00 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 |