Re: WAL consistency check facility
От | Peter Geoghegan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WAL consistency check facility |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM3SWZRfDcv-nHH=V_J-HEcSvN6fqkLFJNj5j7P=D01guN7JiA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WAL consistency check facility (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WAL consistency check facility
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:26 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: >> As far as I am understanding things, we are aiming at something that >> could be used on production systems. >> > > I don't think you can enable it by default in production systems. > Enabling it will lead to significant performance drop as it writes the > whole page after each record for most type of RMGR ID's. > >> And, honestly, any people >> enabling it would just do it for all RMGRs because that's a >> no-brainer. > > Agreed, but remember enabling it for all is not free. I have sympathy for the idea that this should be as low overhead as possible, even if that means adding complexity to the interface -- within reason. I would like to hear a practical example of where this RMGR id interface could be put to good use, when starting with little initial information about a problem. And, ideally, we'd also have some indication of how big a difference that would make, it terms of measurable performance impact. -- Peter Geoghegan
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: