| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: wal_sender_delay (WalSndDelay) has served its purpose |
| Date: | 2011-08-10 23:57:57 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaW6JYWrjZ7pVz9Tni=uWUVXK-M0g+LorOV3tGAZcQbQQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 5:29 PM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
>> AFAICS we could get rid of WalSndDelay: there is no longer any reason
>> for the walsender loop to wake up unless it's received a latch event.
>> (Its WaitLatch call is missing WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH right now, but that
>> is easily fixed.) Is anyone sufficiently attached to that GUC to not
>> want to see it go away?
>
> Please remove.
+1!
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-08-11 01:27:08 | Re: mosbench revisited |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-08-10 22:53:32 | Re: Possible Bug in pg_upgrade |