Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never compress postgresql files
| От | Magnus Hagander |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never compress postgresql files |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CABUevEx=CQcphH33TRcMeUkt-TZ=m+i1JhLHCdoB_FYE5ift2w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never compress postgresql files (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never compress postgresql files
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 3:08 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 6:52 PM Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> Not just to throw a wrench in there, but... Should this perhaps be a tablespace option? ISTM having different filesystems for them is a good reason to use tablespaces in the first place, and then being able to pick different options...
We discussed that a bit earlier in the thread. Some problems about
layering violations and general weirdness, I recall trying it even.
On the flip side, is it right to declare very local
filesystem-specific choices in a system catalogue that is replicated
and affects replicas?
What about a fancier GUC that can reference tablespaces?
Wouldn't that be something that applies to *all* the tablespace configs then, taht is a proper movement of the goalposts? :) Such as being able to set random_page_cost per tablespace to different values on different machines. I agree that it would be useful though. But it seems like a different patch, if useful, and one that should be generic?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: