Re: Is Patch Ok for deferred trigger disk queue? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Is Patch Ok for deferred trigger disk queue?
Date
Msg-id 17776.1057009101@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Is Patch Ok for deferred trigger disk queue?  (Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com>)
Responses Re: Is Patch Ok for deferred trigger disk queue?  (Stuart <deststar@blueyonder.co.uk>)
List pgsql-hackers
Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes:
> As a side question, it looks to me that the code stores the first trigger
> records in memory and then after some point starts storing all new records
> on disk.  Is this correct?  I'd wonder if that's really what you want in
> general, since I'd think that the earliest ones are the ones you're least
> likely to need until end of transaction (or set constraints in the fk
> case) whereas the most recent ones are possibly going to be immediate
> triggers which you're going to need as soon as the statement is done.

Good point.  It would be better to push out stuff from the head of the
queue, hoping that stuff near the end might never need to be written
at all.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephan Szabo
Date:
Subject: Re: Is Patch Ok for deferred trigger disk queue?
Next
From: "Maksim Likharev"
Date:
Subject: Share state ( allocated memory ) across two C functions...