| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Maciek Sakrejda <m(dot)sakrejda(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |
| Date: | 2022-08-04 23:11:13 |
| Message-ID: | 3681339.1659654673@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> And while I'm piling on, how is this bit in RelationCopyStorageUsingBuffer
> not completely broken?
[pile^2] Also, what is the rationale for locking the target buffer
but not the source buffer? That seems pretty hard to justify from
here, even granting the assumption that we don't expect any other
processes to be interested in these buffers (which I don't grant,
because checkpointer).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-08-04 23:12:04 | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2022-08-04 23:01:06 | Re: [Proposal] Fully WAL logged CREATE DATABASE - No Checkpoints |