From: | Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: [pgsql-www] pg_autovacuum is nice ... but ... |
Date: | 2004-11-05 12:00:56 |
Message-ID: | 418B6B78.7040107@bigfoot.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>
>>Moved to -hackers where this belongs :)
>
>
>>On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Justin Clift wrote:
>>
>>>Would making max_fsm_relations and max_fsm_pages dynamically update
>>>themselves whilst PostgreSQL runs be useful?
>
>
> Possibly, but it isn't happening in the foreseeable future, for the same
> reason that we don't auto-update shared_buffers and the other shared
> memory sizing parameters: we can't resize shared memory on the fly.
Right but we can create a new segment and use it too. I don't know how
these segments are used but I used to do it in the past, of course you have
to create a memory manager that handle not ccntinuous segments.
Of course this only if the effort to do it can justify the man power working
on it.
Regards
Gaetano Mendola
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John Hansen | 2004-11-05 12:09:58 | unnest |
Previous Message | Gevik Babakhani | 2004-11-05 10:49:31 | use of IDE's an tools |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2004-11-05 12:33:06 | Re: [pgsql-www] pg_autovacuum is nice ... but ... |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-11-05 02:19:12 | Re: [pgsql-www] pg_autovacuum is nice ... but ... |