Re: confusing checkpoint_flush_after / bgwriter_flush_after

From: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: confusing checkpoint_flush_after / bgwriter_flush_after
Date: 2016-11-26 06:39:02
Message-ID: alpine.DEB.2.20.1611260735370.29326@lancre
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


>> Maybe something like the following, or maybe it should include "bufmgr.h",
>> not sure.
>
> As-is this patch seems like a maintenance time bomb; it really needs to
> use the #defines rather than have the values hard-wired in. However, just
> including bufmgr.h in frontend code doesn't work, so I moved the #defines
> to pg_config_manual.h, which seems like a more reasonable place for them
> anyway. Pushed with that and some other polishing.

Indeed, that's much cleaner and easier to maintain. Thanks.

--
Fabien.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2016-11-26 11:35:42 Re: Parallel Index Scans
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2016-11-26 06:30:54 Re: References to arbitrary database objects that are suitable for pg_dump