Re: Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate 'em
От
Gunnar Rønning
Тема
Re: Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate 'em
Дата
Msg-id
m2bsmi7bvl.fsf@smaug.polygnosis.com
Ответ на
Re: Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate
'em (Bruce Momjian)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate 'em fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler)
Re: Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate
'em Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate 'em Gunnar Rønning <gunnar@polygnosis.com>
Re: Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate
'em Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: Re: Idea: recycle WAL segments, don't delete/recreate 'em Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Bruce Momjian wrote: | Most Unix filesystems will not allocate disk blocks until you write in | them. If you just seek out past end-of-file, the file pointer is moved | but the blocks are unallocated. This is how 'ls' can show a 1gb file | that only uses 4k of disk space. Does this imply that we could get a performance gain by preallocating space for indexes and data itself as well ? I've seen that other database products have a setup step where you have to specify the size of the database. Or does PostgreSQL do any other tricks to prevent fragmentation of data ? -- Gunnar Rønning - gunnar@polygnosis.com Senior Consultant, Polygnosis AS, http://www.polygnosis.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления