Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От andres@anarazel.de (Andres Freund)
Тема Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem
Дата
Msg-id 20160902031927.mchzocis5lnymykz@alap3.anarazel.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem  (Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 2016-09-02 08:31:42 +0530, Robert Haas wrote:
> I wonder whether we ought to just switch from the consistent method to
> the semiconsistent method and call it good.

+1. I think, before long, we're going to have to switch away from having
locks & partitions in the first place. So I don't see a problem relaxing
this. It's not like that consistency really buys you anything...  I'd
even consider not using any locks.

Andres



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem