Subject about says it all. Should I be more concerned about checkpoints
happening 'frequently' or lasting 'longer'? In other words, is it ok to
checkpoint say, every 5 minutes, if it only last a second or three or better
to have checkpoints every 10 minutes that last half a minute? Stupid
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:25 AM, Douglas J Hunley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Subject about says it all. Should I be more concerned about checkpoints
happening 'frequently' or lasting 'longer'? In other words, is it ok to
checkpoint say, every 5 minutes, if it only last a second or three or
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Douglas J Hunley wrote:
In other words, is it ok to checkpoint say, every 5 minutes, if it only
last a second or three or better to have checkpoints every 10 minutes
that last half a minute?
When checkpoints do too much work at once they will block clients for a
On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Chris Browne wrote:
Now, if you have reasonable settings (I'm not sure how well its tuning
is documented :-(), checkpoint flushes should be able to be short,
however infrequent they may be. In effect, the oops, the database got
blocked by checkpoint flushing issue should
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Douglas J Hunley) writes:
Subject about says it all. Should I be more concerned about checkpoints
happening 'frequently' or lasting 'longer'? In other words, is it ok to
checkpoint say, every 5 minutes, if it only last a second or three or better
to have checkpoints every
