Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqToM0aXEUTYKoOQ7BTt2OErfXdWpQZfr84b09sVSkv-ww@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] increasing the default WAL segment size
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> Problems 2-4 actually have to do with a DestReceiver of type >> DestRemote really, really wanting to have an associated Portal and >> database connection, so one approach is to create a stripped-down >> DestReceiver that doesn't care about those things and then passing >> that to GetPGVariable. > > I tried that and it worked out pretty well, so I'm inclined to go with > this approach. Proposed patches attached. 0001 adds the new > DestReceiver type, and 0002 is a revised patch to implement the SHOW > command itself. > > Thoughts, comments? This looks like a sensible approach to me. DestRemoteSimple could be useful for background workers that are not connected to a database as well. Isn't there a problem with PGC_REAL parameters? -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: