Re: WAL fsync scheduling

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WAL fsync scheduling
Date: 2000-11-18 18:19:32
Message-ID: 5833.974571572@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>>>>> how about sigpause, and using SIGUSR1/SIGUSR2 to wake them up ?

> The standard is sigsuspend:

OK, we can probably assume that at least one of sigsuspend or sigpause
is available everywhere. Now all you need is a free signal number.
Unfortunately we're already using both SIGUSR1 and SIGUSR2.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2000-11-18 18:26:09 Re: WAL fsync scheduling
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2000-11-18 18:16:02 Re: WAL fsync scheduling