| From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Andreas Zeugswetter <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)telecom(dot)at>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.5 items |
| Date: | 1999-06-07 13:20:32 |
| Message-ID: | 199906071320.JAA03628@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > What is it on the backend that causes some backend to think there is
> > another segment. Does it just go off the end of the max segment size
> > and try to open another, or do we store the number of segments
> > somewhere. I thought it was the former in sgml() area. I honestly don't
> > care if the segment files stay around if that is going to be a reliable
> > solution.
>
> Other then the inode being used, what is wrong with a zero-length segment
> file?
Nothing is wrong with it. I just thought it would be more reliable to
unlink it, but now am considering I was wrong.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dmitry Samersoff | 1999-06-07 13:26:36 | Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL History(Parody) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-06-07 13:18:47 | Re: [HACKERS] postgresql-v6.5beta2.tar.gz ... |