| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Idea for improving speed of pg_restore |
| Date: | 2003-09-16 23:21:03 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0309161719380.5840-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003, scott.marlowe wrote:
>
> > Not so sure on whether the foot gun is a good idea. We already have .22
> > calibre foot gun (fsync) that makes for pretty big improvements in load
> > speed, and we see people all the time on General and Performance running
> > production servers with it turned off. You know as well as I do the
> > second we make WAL optional, some people are gonna start running
> > production servers with it.
>
> it shouldn't be too difficult to put some sort of restrictions on its
> usual ... say if WAL disabled, max connections == 2? :)
Even better, restrict logins to superuser only, that way we could still
have more than 2 things happening (think of a machine with a huge number
of disks in a RAID array kinda thing) or only updateable / writeable by
the superuser when in non-WAL mode.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2003-09-16 23:32:21 | Re: Idea for improving speed of pg_restore |
| Previous Message | Ron Johnson | 2003-09-16 22:46:15 | Re: Idea for improving speed of pg_restore |