Re: [HACKERS] Background writer committed

2003-11-20 Thread Jan Wieck
Shridhar Daithankar wrote: Jan Wieck wrote: I committed the first part of the background writer process. We had a consensus on attempting to avoid write() calls from regular backends, but did no come to any conclusions what to do to force the kernel to actually do some IO. Consequently, this

[HACKERS] Background writer committed

2003-11-19 Thread Jan Wieck
I committed the first part of the background writer process. We had a consensus on attempting to avoid write() calls from regular backends, but did no come to any conclusions what to do to force the kernel to actually do some IO. Consequently, this patch is a separate process launched by

Re: [HACKERS] Background writer committed

2003-11-19 Thread Bruce Momjian
TODO updated: * -Use background process to write dirty shared buffers to disk --- Jan Wieck wrote: I committed the first part of the background writer process. We had a consensus on attempting to avoid write()

Re: [HACKERS] Background writer committed

2003-11-19 Thread Shridhar Daithankar
Jan Wieck wrote: I committed the first part of the background writer process. We had a consensus on attempting to avoid write() calls from regular backends, but did no come to any conclusions what to do to force the kernel to actually do some IO. Consequently, this patch is a separate process