Re: It's past time to redo the smgr API

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: It's past time to redo the smgr API
Date: 2004-02-05 23:14:38
Message-ID: 17593.1076022878@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
> Why? Setting it to the checkpoint interval itself should be sufficient,
> no? All you want to do is avoid closing any files that were used during
> that last checkpoint interval, since there is a good chance you'd have to
> once more reopen them in the checkpoint interval ...

If we did that then (on Windows) every DROP TABLE would take one extra
checkpoint interval to take effect in terms of freeing disk space.
Not sure if this is a good tradeoff for avoiding some file opens.

In any case, I think we should leave it to be debated after we see what
the Windows file-closing solution turns out to be. It might become a
non-issue.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2004-02-05 23:24:43 Re: It's past time to redo the smgr API
Previous Message Marc G. Fournier 2004-02-05 22:43:23 Re: It's past time to redo the smgr API