Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2015-04-21 16:21:47 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> All that having been said, I don't think adding a new fork is a good
>> approach.  We already have problems pretty commonly where our
>> customers complain about running out of inodes.  Adding another fork
>> for every table would exacerbate that problem considerably.
>
> Really? These days? There's good arguments against another fork
> (increased number of fsyncs, more stat calls, increased number of file
> handles, more WAL logging, ...), but the number of inodes themselves
> seems like something halfway recent filesystems should handle.

Not making it up...

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company