| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes |
| Date: | 2015-03-03 00:24:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20150303002410.GC698@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-03-03 08:59:30 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Already mentioned upthread, but I agree with Fujii-san here: adding
> information related to the state of a block image in
> XLogRecordBlockHeader makes little sense because we are not sure to
> have a block image, perhaps there is only data associated to it, and
> that we should control that exclusively in XLogRecordBlockImageHeader
> and let the block ID alone for now.
This argument doesn't make much sense to me. The flag byte could very
well indicate 'block reference without image following' vs 'block
reference with data + hole following' vs 'block reference with
compressed data following'.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2015-03-03 00:34:00 | Re: pgaudit - an auditing extension for PostgreSQL |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-03-02 23:59:30 | Re: [REVIEW] Re: Compression of full-page-writes |