Hiroki Kataoka [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think there is no problem. Bloating will make pages including the
unnecessary area which will not be accessed. Soon, those pages will be
registered into DSM.
Except the whole point of the DSM is to let us vacuum those pages *before*
that happens...
8.2 branch doesn't compile with LOCK_DEBUG enabled because of a missing
include. It was added to CVS HEAD in December..
Index: src/backend/utils/misc/guc.c
===
RCS file:
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:22 +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
8.2 branch doesn't compile with LOCK_DEBUG enabled
Applied, thanks.
-Neil
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
I don't insist the name and the default of the GUC parameter.
I'm afraid wal_fullpage_optimization = on (default) makes
some confusion because the default behavior becomes a bit
different on WAL itself.
Seems my wal_fullpage_optimization is not a good name if it caused
misinterpretation
Hackers,
Writing lots of additional code simply to remove a parameter that
*might* be mis-interpreted doesn't sound useful to me, especially when
bugs may leak in that way. My take is that this is simple and useful
*and* we have it now; other ways don't yet exist, nor will they in time
for
Hi,
Sorry, because of so many comments/questions, I'll write inline
Josh Berkus wrote:
Hackers,
Writing lots of additional code simply to remove a parameter that
*might* be mis-interpreted doesn't sound useful to me, especially when
bugs may leak in that way. My take is that this is
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
In the sync phase, we sleep between each fsync until enough time/segments
have passed, assuming that the time to fsync is proportional to the file
length. I'm not sure that's a very good assumption.
I've been making scatter plots of fsync time
