Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> 
> >>Just to make my position perfectly clear: I don't want to see this
> >>option shipped in 8.1.  It's reasonable to have it in there for now
> >>as an aid to our performance investigations, but I don't see that it
> >>has any value for production.
> > 
> > 
> > Well, this is the first I am hearing that, and of course your position
> > is just one vote.
> 
> True but your "feature" was added after feature freeze ;). I don't see

My patch was posted days before the feature freeze.

> this as a good thing overall. We should be looking for a solution not a 
> band-aid that if you tear it off will pull the skin.

Sure, having it be _like_ fsync is not a good thing.  Seems we can roll
it into the fsync option, improve it, or remove it.

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073