| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Dickson S(dot) Guedes" <listas(at)guedesoft(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer |
| Date: | 2011-10-18 16:39:06 |
| Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa=+TfNpFHss8-6h6MO2HPxLLEg9fJY0hgD4mKozRKFNg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:18 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Any reason or objection to committing this patch?
Not on my end, though I haven't reviewed it in detail. One minor note
- I was mildly surprised to see that you moved this to the
checkpointer rather than leaving it in the bgwriter:
+ /* Do this once before starting the loop, then just at SIGHUP time. */
+ SyncRepUpdateSyncStandbysDefined();
My preference would probably have been to leave that in the background
writer, on the theory that the checkpointer's work is likely to be
more bursty and therefore it might be less responsive.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-10-18 16:44:03 | Re: new compiler warnings |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-10-18 16:29:45 | Re: new compiler warnings |