| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock |
| Date: | 2011-12-15 16:48:47 |
| Message-ID: | 7530.1323967727@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> This patch may or may not be useful, but this description of it is utter
>> nonsense, because we already do compute that before taking the lock.
>> Please try again to explain what you're doing?
> Currently the CRC of all the data minus the header is computed outside the lock,
> but then the header's computation is added and the CRC is finalized
> inside the lock.
Quite. AFAICS that is not optional, unless you are proposing to remove
the prev_link from the scope of the CRC, which is not exactly a
penalty-free change.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | pratikchirania | 2011-12-15 16:55:48 | pgstat wait timeout |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2011-12-15 16:46:05 | Re: Command Triggers |