| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress |
| Date: | 2016-12-21 21:28:54 |
| Message-ID: | 20161221212854.acmw7d2s2rvbcsg5@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
A mime-type of invalid/octet-stream? That's an, uh, odd choice.
Working on committing this (tomorrow morning, not tonight). There's
some relatively minor things I want to change:
- I don't like the name XLogSetFlags() - it's completely unclear what
that those flags refer to - it could just as well be replay
related. XLogSetRecordFlags()?
- Similarly I don't like the name "progress LSN" much. What does
"progress" really mean in that". Maybe "consistency LSN"?
- It's currently required to avoid triggering archive timeouts and
checkpoints triggering each other, but I'm nervous marking all xlog
switches as unimportant. I think it'd be better to only mark timeout
triggered switches as such.
Otherwise this seems to look good.
Regards,
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-12-21 21:35:28 | Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2016-12-21 21:14:23 | Re: Measuring replay lag |