From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code |
Date: | 2008-12-24 15:31:17 |
Message-ID: | 1230132677.4793.1150.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2008-12-25 at 00:10 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 7:58 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Yes, OK. So I think it would only work when full_page_writes = on, and
> >> has been on since last checkpoint. So two changes:
> >>
> >> * We just need a boolean that starts at true every checkpoint and gets
> >> set to false anytime someone resets full_page_writes or archive_command.
> >> If the flag is set && full_page_writes = on then we skip the checkpoint
> >> entirely and use the value from the last checkpoint.
> >
> > Sounds good.
>
> I attached the self-contained patch to skip checkpoint at pg_start_backup.
Good.
Can we change to IMMEDIATE when it we need the checkpoint?
What is bkpCount for? I think we should discuss whatever that is for
separately. It isn't used in any if test, AFAICS.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Emmanuel Cecchet | 2008-12-24 15:39:24 | Re: Sync Rep: Second thoughts |
Previous Message | Mark Mielke | 2008-12-24 15:18:23 | Re: Synchronous replication, reading WAL for sending |