On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > Gavin Sherry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > >> What? > > > The discussion Simon is refering to came up during the 8.0 beta IIRC. The > > problem was that we were not allocating xlogs quickly enough under > > heavy workloads and there was some discussion about the bgwriter taking > > over this task since it could assess the need for new xlogs more often. > > Huh? The bgwriter already has this task, since it runs checkpoints. > > It's possible that we ought to allow more "slop" in the number of > prealloc'd xlog segments --- I think that the current code is probably > too enthusiastic about deleting "extra" segments after a spike in > activity subsides. But I don't see the point of moving the > responsibility somewhere else.
I guess I was recalling this part of the earlier thread: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-07/msg01088.php Thanks, Gavin ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
