Re: Some ideas about Vacuum
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Some ideas about Vacuum |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24876.1200502373@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Some ideas about Vacuum (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Some ideas about Vacuum
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > Tom Lane escribió: >> It would only be useful to have one per spindle-dedicated-to-WAL, so >> tying the division to databases doesn't seem like it'd be a good idea. > Keep in mind that there are claims that a write-cache-enabled > battery-backed RAID controller negates the effect of a separate spindle. Possibly true, but if that's the underlying hardware then there's no performance benefit in breaking WAL up at all, no? > My point, rather, is that with this sort of setup it would be easier to > do per-database PITR shipping, and one database's WAL activity would not > affect another's (thus hosting providers are happier -- high-rate > customer A need not affect low-budget customer B). You won't get far with that because of the shared catalogs. In particular, most DDL operations these days touch pg_shdepend ... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: