Re: Checkpoints and buffers that are hint-bit-dirty

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Checkpoints and buffers that are hint-bit-dirty
Date: 2007-07-07 15:23:28
Message-ID: 1948.1183821808@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> When we checkpoint we write out all dirty buffers. But ISTM we don't really
> need to write out buffers which are dirty but which have an LSN older than the
> previous checkpoint. Those represent buffers which were dirtied by a
> non-wal-logged modification, ie, hint bit setting. The other non-wal-logged
> operations will sync the buffer themselves when they're done.

In the current dispensation we don't really care how long a checkpoint
takes, so I don't see the advantage to be gained.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-07-07 15:40:17 Re: usleep feature for pgbench
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2007-07-07 14:31:04 Fixed from TODO?