On Sat, 2013-04-06 at 16:44 +0200, Andres Freund wrote: > I think we can just make up the rule that changing full page writes also > requires SpinLockAcquire(&xlogctl->info_lck);. Then its easy enough. And > it can hardly be a performance bottleneck given how infrequently its > modified.
That seems like a good idea to me. As it stands, checksums basically force full page writes to be on; so we should either fix that or document it. > In retrospect I think making up the rule that full_page_writes changes > imply a checkpoint would have made things easier performance and > codewise. I don't even see why we allow changing that while the server is on. Either the I/O system requires it for safety or not, right? Regards, Jeff Davis -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers