Re: Instrument checkpoint sync calls

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Instrument checkpoint sync calls
Date: 2010-12-15 14:53:02
Message-ID: AANLkTimfCQYq4QdKi_ocsJWu_UW8LTnrEd7MGVrk=pBA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> patch I submit.  Doesn't seem worth going through the trouble of committing
> that minor rework on its own, I'll slip it into the next useful thing that
> touches this area I do.  Thanks for the hint, this would work better than
> what I did.

Well, if I'm the one committing it, I'll pull that part out again and
commit it separately. Not sure if that affects your calculus, but I
much prefer patches that don't try to do ancillary things along the
way.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-12-15 14:53:09 Re: hstores in pl/python
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-12-15 14:51:22 Re: Default mode for shutdown