Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Vadim Mikheev
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6
Дата
Msg-id 375A68D0.A8DD3AC9@krs.ru
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Don Baccus <dhogaza@pacifier.com> writes:
> > While I don't doubt your analysis is correct for the case you've
> > uncovered, it doesn't explain why surrounding a bunch of selects
> > with a begin/end block greatly descreases disk activity for tables
> > that don't change.
> 
> Hmm, I'm not sure why that should be, either.  Anyone?

pg_log fsync for read-only xactions...
And more of that, commit fsyncs ALL dirty buffers
in pool, even dirtied not by xaction being committed!

Vadim


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Vadim Mikheev
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6
Следующее
От: Vadim Mikheev
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Priorities for 6.6