Re: max_wal_senders must die
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: max_wal_senders must die |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTiki-9KcFHAMjBfE5C+OcfNVhxtivW=K_920_j5y@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: max_wal_senders must die (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: max_wal_senders must die
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > On 10/20/10 6:54 PM, Robert Haas wrote: >> I find it impossible to believe that's >> a good decision, and IMHO we should be focusing on how to make the >> parameters PGC_SIGHUP rather than PGC_POSTMASTER, which would give us >> most of the same benefits without throwing away hard-won performance. > > I'd be happy to accept that. Is it possible, though? I sketched an outline of the problem AIUI here: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2010-10/msg01348.php I think it's possible; I'm not quite sure how hard it is. Unfortunately, I've not had as much PG-hacking time lately as I'd like... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: