Re: WAL/PITR additional items

Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au> writes:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What?

> The discussion Simon is refering to came up during the 8.0 beta IIRC. The
> problem was that we were not allocating xlogs quickly enough under
> heavy workloads and there was some discussion about the bgwriter taking
> over this task since it could assess the need for new xlogs more often.

Huh?  The bgwriter already has this task, since it runs checkpoints.

It's possible that we ought to allow more "slop" in the number of
prealloc'd xlog segments --- I think that the current code is probably
too enthusiastic about deleting "extra" segments after a spike in
activity subsides.  But I don't see the point of moving the
responsibility somewhere else.
        regards, tom lane