| From: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal for Implenting read-only queries during wal replay (SoC 2007) |
| Date: | 2007-02-27 14:11:05 |
| Message-ID: | 45E43BF9.1070404@phlo.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Merlin Moncure wrote:
> getting back on topic (ahem), florian: are you comfortable going ahead
> with this? is there anything you need help with?
I'm currently updating my proposal, trying to incorporate the points
people brought up in this thread.
I realized that trying to use the same kind of "read only mode" for
both a standalone postgres (with the datadir on read-only storage),
and a PITR-slave was missguided -
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2005-11/msg01043.php
was really enlightning ;-)
Tom's objects regarding performance are the hardest one to deal with -
I'm currently thinking about ways that the locking requirements could
be relaxed - though I still plan to do a basic implementation first, and
then try to improve it.
I'll post an updated proposal during the next few days.
greetings, Florian Pflug
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chad Wagner | 2007-02-27 14:13:43 | Re: Developer TODO List as a PostgreSQL DB |
| Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-02-27 14:07:06 | Re: Expanding DELETE/UPDATE returning |