| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL logging problem in 9.4.3? |
| Date: | 2015-07-24 06:27:13 |
| Message-ID: | 55B1DAC1.3030804@iki.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 07/23/2015 09:38 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
>>
>> This is more invasive than I'd like to backpatch, but I think it's the
>> simplest approach that works, and doesn't disable any of the important
>> optimizations we have.
>
> Hmm, isn't HeapNeedsWAL() a lot more costly than RelationNeedsWAL()?
Yes. But it's still very cheap, especially in the common case that the
pending syncs hash table is empty.
> Should we be worried about that?
It doesn't worry me.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc Mamin | 2015-07-24 06:52:58 | pg_dump -Fd and compression level |
| Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2015-07-24 06:10:59 | Re: Asynchronous execution on FDW |