Re: [HACKERS] next XID is in shmem now...

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Bruce Momjian
Тема Re: [HACKERS] next XID is in shmem now...
Дата
Msg-id 199807211746.NAA01079@candle.pha.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] next XID is in shmem now...  (Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru>)
Список pgsql-hackers
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > > Backends fetch 1024 XIDs now and place them in shmem.
> > > There is space in VariableCache struct for OIDs as well
> > > but I didn't change GetNewObjectId() due to the
> > > CheckMaxObjectId() stuff... Bruce ?
> >
> > What can I do to help?  Is the problem that a backend can set the next
> > oid by specifiying an oid greater than the current one?
>
> No problem - I just havn't time to think about this, sorry.
>
> >
> > >
> > > All other LLL stuff will be #ifdef-ed...
> >
> > As far as I am concerned, you don't need use #ifdef.
>
> I'm not sure how much ready/robust this will be in 6.4.
> This is long-term project...

Any chance on getting the 30-second pg_log syncing, so we can improve
the default pgsql performance, and not do fsync on every transaction by
default?


--
Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Vince Vielhaber
Дата:
Сообщение: Hey Linux People (OT)
Следующее
От: Hannu Krosing
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Oracle on Linux