| From: | Takashi Menjo <takashi(dot)menjo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | takashi(dot)menjou(dot)vg(at)hco(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistent memory |
| Date: | 2020-08-04 06:11:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAOwnP3ONd9uXPXKoc5AAfnpCnCyOna1ru6sU=eY_4WfMjaKG9A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear hackers,
I rebased my old patchset. It would be good to compare this v4 patchset to
non-volatile WAL buffer's one [1].
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/002101d649fb$1f5966e0$5e0c34a0$@hco.ntt.co.jp_1
Regards,
Takashi
--
Takashi Menjo <takashi(dot)menjo(at)gmail(dot)com>
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0001-Add-configure-option-for-PMDK.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.5 KB |
| v4-0003-Walreceiver-WAL-IO-using-PMDK.patch | application/octet-stream | 5.0 KB |
| v4-0002-Read-write-WAL-files-using-PMDK.patch | application/octet-stream | 43.5 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Langote | 2020-08-04 06:15:00 | Re: ModifyTable overheads in generic plans |
| Previous Message | Thomas Munro | 2020-08-04 06:02:29 | Re: Handing off SLRU fsyncs to the checkpointer |