Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST
| От | Tom Lane | 
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST | 
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4034.1292613755@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст | 
| Ответ на | Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) | 
| Ответы | Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST | 
| Список | pgsql-hackers | 
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On 17.12.2010 21:07, Tom Lane wrote:
>> IIUC, the problem is that the bufmgr might think that a GIST NSN is an
>> LSN that should affect when to force out a dirty buffer?  What if we
>> taught it the difference?  We could for example dedicate a pd_flags
>> bit to marking pages whose pd_lsn isn't actually an LSN.
> I'm not very fond of expanding buffer manager's knowledge of the page 
> layout. How about a new flag in the buffer desc, BM_UNLOGGED?
That could work too, if you can explain how the flag comes to be set
without a bunch of ugliness all over the system.  I don't want callers
of ReadBuffer to have to supply the bit for example.
        regards, tom lane
		
	В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: