Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
In a steady-state situation new WAL files are not created very often
because we recycle old ones, so it probably doesn't make much difference.
Yeah. We really don't worry too much about the performance of the
new-WAL-file-creation code path
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> In a steady-state situation new WAL files are not created very often
> because we recycle old ones, so it probably doesn't make much difference.
Yeah. We really don't worry too much about the performance of the
new-WAL-file-creation code path because of this.
On 10/06/10 18:17, Mark Wong wrote:
On Jun 9, 2010, at 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
wrote:
I don't think POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED does what you think it does. It
tells the kernel that "you don't need to keep these pages in the cache
anymore, I won't be accessing them anymore". If you call it when yo
On Jun 9, 2010, at 11:25 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > wrote:
On 10/06/10 06:47, Mark Wong wrote:
I wanted to propose a fix for to xlog.c regarding the use of
posix_fadvise() for 9.1 (unless someone feels it's ok for 9.0).
Currently posix_fadvise() is used right before a log file is closed
so
On 10/06/10 06:47, Mark Wong wrote:
I wanted to propose a fix for to xlog.c regarding the use of
posix_fadvise() for 9.1 (unless someone feels it's ok for 9.0).
Currently posix_fadvise() is used right before a log file is closed so
it's effectively not doing anything, when posix_fadvise is to be
Hi all,
I wanted to propose a fix for to xlog.c regarding the use of
posix_fadvise() for 9.1 (unless someone feels it's ok for 9.0).
Currently posix_fadvise() is used right before a log file is closed so
it's effectively not doing anything, when posix_fadvise is to be
called. This patch moves the
