Re: WAL recycling, Linux 2.4.18
От | Curt Sampson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WAL recycling, Linux 2.4.18 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.NEB.4.44.0207091711110.21914-100000@angelic.cynic.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WAL recycling, Linux 2.4.18 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: WAL recycling, Linux 2.4.18
|
Список | pgsql-general |
On Mon, 8 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > Well, that's not unexpected; checkpoint is going to issue a deal of I/O > and then sync() it. But that should *not* cause blockage of other > backends; at worst they should slow down a bit due to I/O contention. Well, depending on how the OS schedules writes, one process doing a huge amount of writing might well slow down everything else a lot, unless you've got a really good disk system. But is it possible for a process to commit a transaction while a checkpoint is in progress? That would mean that it's ok for the checkpoint record to be after a bunch of transactions that are not part of the checkpoint, right? cjs -- Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: