Re: Tracking of page changes for backup purposes. PTRACK [POC]

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: Tracking of page changes for backup purposes. PTRACK [POC]
Дата
Msg-id CA+TgmoZTThYRPWaDc8OXaMLbaxCBJtcdex+NRCunXM5xs=yZBg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Tracking of page changes for backup purposes. PTRACK [POC]  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Tracking of page changes for backup purposes. PTRACK [POC]  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > So I'm somewhat hesitant to proclaim option 5 as the clear winner, here.
>>
>> I agree.  I think (4) is better.
>
> Can depends on load? For smaller intensive updated databases the 5 can be
> optimal, for large less updated databases the 4 can be better.

It seems to me that the difference is that (4) tracks which pages have
changed in the background, and (5) does it in the foreground.  Why
would we want the latter?

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


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Pavel Stehule
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Tracking of page changes for backup purposes. PTRACK [POC]
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Bitmap table scan cost per page formula