From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Should commit_delay be PGC_SIGHUP? |
Date: | 2013-03-21 19:32:24 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZTVf+AKMD55YOq9CfHnMzTdObweQ1Q7euxmrDw3XXvAHA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> This may be true, but so what? We don't generally restrict changing
> GUC settings on the grounds that people probably won't wish to do so
> because it isn't useful. We restrict it in situations where it is not
> technically possible or is liable to be harmful.
Sure, but that isn't what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned about
people being lulled into a false sense of security about setting
commit_delay to 0 locally. If they do that, their actual additional
delay at commit time may well be only marginally less than the full
commit_delay, and will only rarely actually be 0.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2013-03-21 20:27:25 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix "element <@ range" cost estimation. |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-03-21 19:17:54 | Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL [review] |