Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CANbhV-EVrOSZqk0MofgZa1xqNmFgXwFaC6JyvBfDR+stqzAfLQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach) (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 16:41, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > > On 4/12/22 15:58, Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 at 08:46, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> With that... I've finally pushed the 0002 patch and will be watching > >> the build farm. > > > > This is a nice feature if it is safe to turn off full_page_writes. > > > > When is it safe to do that? On which platform? > > > > I am not aware of any released software that allows full_page_writes > > to be safely disabled. Perhaps something has been released recently > > that allows this? I think we have substantial documentation about > > safety of other settings, so we should carefully document things here > > also. > > > > I don't see why/how would an async prefetch make FPW unnecessary. Did > anyone claim that be the case? Other way around. FPWs make prefetch unnecessary. Therefore you would only want prefetch with FPW=off, AFAIK. Or put this another way: when is it safe and sensible to use recovery_prefetch != off? -- Simon Riggs http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: