Excerpts from Devrim GÜNDÜZ's message of mié jun 30 14:54:06 -0400 2010:
> One of the things that interested me was parallel recovery feature. They > said that they are keeping separate xlogs for each database, which > speeds ups recovery in case of a crash. It also would increase > performance, since we could write xlogs to separate disks. I'm not sure about this. You'd need to have one extra WAL stream, for shared catalogs; and what would you do to a transaction that touches both shared catalogs and also local objects? You'd have to split the WAL entries in those two WAL streams. I think you could try to solve this by having yet another WAL stream for transaction commit, and have the database-specific streams reference that one. Operations touching shared catalogs would act as barriers: all other databases' WAL streams would have to be synchronized to that one. This would still allow you to have some concurrency because, presumably, operations on shared catalogs are rare. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
