| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim4o(at)email(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance lossage in checkpoint dumping |
| Date: | 2001-02-17 20:01:45 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSF.4.33.0102171601150.81548-100000@mobile.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > No, but I haven't looked at it. I am now much more concerned with the
> > > delay, and am wondering if I should start thinking about trying my idea
> > > of looking for near-committers and post the patch to the list to see if
> > > anyone likes it for 7.1 final. Vadim will not be back in enough time to
> > > write any new code in this area, I am afraid.
> >
> > Near committers? *puzzled look*
>
> Umm, uh, it means backends that have entered COMMIT and will be issuing
> an fsync() of their own very soon. It took me a while to remember what
> I mean too because I was thinking of CVS committers.
That's what I was thinking to, which was what was confusing the hell out
of me ... like, a near committer ... is that the guy sitting beside you
while you commit? :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2001-02-17 20:06:00 | Re: Performance lossage in checkpoint dumping |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2001-02-17 19:44:55 | Re: WAL and commit_delay |