Re: Process wakeups when idle and power consumption
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Process wakeups when idle and power consumption |
Дата | |
Msg-id | BANLkTi=ZygkqPvaFoDJcT8M6Bh9cB2MTAw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Process wakeups when idle and power consumption (Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Process wakeups when idle and power consumption
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 5:14 AM, Peter Geoghegan <peter@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 10 May 2011 09:45, Heikki Linnakangas > <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> I think we need to refactor the function into something like: >> >> #define WL_LATCH_SET 1 >> #define WL_SOCKET_READABLE 2 >> #define WL_SOCKET_WRITEABLE 4 >> #define WL_TIMEOUT 8 >> #define WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH 16 > > While I agree with the need to not box ourselves into a corner on the > latch interface by making sweeping assumptions, isn't the fact that a > socket became readable or writable strictly an implementation detail? The thing about the socket being readable/writeable is needed for walsender. It needs to notice when its connection to walreceiver is writeable (so it can send more WAL) or readable (so it can receive a reply message). -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: