Re: WAL & SHM principles

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Martin Devera <devik(at)cdi(dot)cz>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WAL & SHM principles
Date: 2001-03-08 16:45:16
Message-ID: 200103081645.LAA03243@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> > > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > > > The only problem is that we would no longer have control over which
> > > > pages made it to disk. The OS would perhaps write pages as we modified
> > > > them. Not sure how important that is.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, this alone is a *fatal* objection. See nearby
> > > discussions about WAL behavior: we must be able to control the relative
> > > timing of WAL write/flush and data page writes.
> >
> > Bummer.
> >
> BTW, what means "bummer" ?

Sorry, it means, "Oh, I am disappointed."

> But for many OSes you CAN control when to write data - you can mlock
> individual pages.

mlock() controls locking in physical memory. I don't see it controling
write().

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-03-08 17:03:33 Re: Proposed WAL changes
Previous Message Trond Eivind =?iso-8859-1?q?Glomsr=F8d?= 2001-03-08 16:43:16 Re: How to shoot yourself in the foot: kill -9 postmaster