Hi Greg,
On Sunday, September 25, 2011 03:25:50 AM Greg Stark wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Magnus Hagander
wrote:
> > I was assuming the kernel was smart enough to read this as "*this*
> > process is not going to be using this file anymore", not "nobody in
> > the whole machine is g
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> I was assuming the kernel was smart enough to read this as "*this*
> process is not going to be using this file anymore", not "nobody in
> the whole machine is going to use this file anymore". And the process
> running the base backup is ce
2011/9/24 Andres Freund :
> Hi,
>
> On Saturday, September 24, 2011 05:16:48 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 17:14, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > On Saturday, September 24, 2011 05:08:17 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> >> Attached patch adds a simple call to posix_fadvise with
>> >>
Hi,
On Saturday, September 24, 2011 05:16:48 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 17:14, Andres Freund wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 24, 2011 05:08:17 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >> Attached patch adds a simple call to posix_fadvise with
> >> POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED on all the file
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 17:14, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Saturday, September 24, 2011 05:08:17 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Attached patch adds a simple call to posix_fadvise with
>> POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED on all the files being read when doing a base
>> backup, to help the kernel not to tras
Hi,
On Saturday, September 24, 2011 05:08:17 PM Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Attached patch adds a simple call to posix_fadvise with
> POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED on all the files being read when doing a base
> backup, to help the kernel not to trash the filesystem cache.
>
> Seems like a simple enough fix -
Attached patch adds a simple call to posix_fadvise with
POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED on all the files being read when doing a base
backup, to help the kernel not to trash the filesystem cache.
Seems like a simple enough fix - in fact, I don't remember why I took
it out of the original patch :O
Any reason
