From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Rahila Syed <rahilasyed(dot)90(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Compression of full-page-writes |
Date: | 2014-05-28 15:04:13 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nML8saiDp79EZuJv+yqfR7UPW4aADcwzCFCAiG=94+n0Rw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 28 May 2014 15:34, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Also, compress_backup_block GUC needs to be merged with full_page_writes.
>
> Basically I agree with you because I don't want to add new GUC very similar to
> the existing one.
>
> But could you imagine the case where full_page_writes = off. Even in this case,
> FPW is forcibly written only during base backup. Such FPW also should be
> compressed? Which compression algorithm should be used? If we want to
> choose the algorithm for such FPW, we would not be able to merge those two
> GUCs. IMO it's OK to always use the best compression algorithm for such FPW
> and merge them, though.
I'd prefer a new name altogether
torn_page_protection = 'full_page_writes'
torn_page_protection = 'compressed_full_page_writes'
torn_page_protection = 'none'
this allows us to add new techniques later like
torn_page_protection = 'background_FPWs'
or
torn_page_protection = 'double_buffering'
when/if we add those new techniques
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-05-28 15:23:31 | pg_sleep() doesn't work well with recovery conflict interrupts. |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-05-28 14:38:18 | Re: Re: popen and pclose redefinitions causing many warning in Windows build |