From: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Postgresql-General <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007) |
Date: | 2007-02-23 18:10:27 |
Message-ID: | 45DF2E13.9060304@phlo.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Florian G. Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
>> I plan to submit a proposal for implementing support for
>> read-only queries during wal replay as a "Google Summer of Code 2007"
>> project.
>
> You are discussing this on the wrong list.
So what list would be more appropriate?
>> B) Split StartupXLOG into two steps. The first (Recovery) will process
>> only enough wal to bring the system into a consistent state,
>
> How will you know what that is?
With the same logic that postgres uses now to bring an file-system backup
into a consistent state when doing PITR.
>> C) Combine A) and B), in the simplest possible way.
>> Introduce a global R/W lock, which is taken by the Replay part
>> of B) in write mode before replaying a chunk, then released,
>> and immediatly reaquired before replaying the next chunk.
>
> That seems certain to result in intolerable performance, for both the
> queries and the replay process.
That depends entirely on the usecase. And besides, this limitation could
and probably would be adressed in the future. I think a step-by-step
approach is more likely to be successfull then attempting to solve
all problems at once.
greetings, Florian Pflug
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-02-23 18:11:08 | Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: SCMS question |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2007-02-23 17:29:35 | Re: SCMS question |