Re: [HACKERS] v6.4 - What is planned...? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: [HACKERS] v6.4 - What is planned...?
Date
Msg-id 199806081529.LAA09224@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] v6.4 - What is planned...?  (Vadim Mikheev <vadim@krs.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
>
> Well, my plans for 6.4:
>
> 1. Btree: use TID as (last) part of index key; prepare btree
>    for low-level locking (it's now possible to lose root page).
> 2. Vacuum: speed up index cleaning; release pg_class lock after
>    updation statistic for a table.
> 3. Buffer manager: error handling broken; should flush only
>    buffers changed by backend itself.
> 4. Implement shared catalog cache; get rid of invalidation code.
> 5. Subselects: in target list; in FROM.
> 6. Transaction manager: get rid of pg_variable; do not prefetch
>    XIDs; nested transactions; savepoints.

That's quite a list.

Vadim, I hate to ask, but how about the buffering of pg_log writes and
the ability to do sync() every 30 seconds then flush pg_log, so we can
have crash reliability without doing fsync() on every transaction.

We discussed this months ago, and I am not sure if you were thinking of
doing this for 6.4.  I can send the old posts if that would help.  It
would certainly increase our speed vs. fsync().

--
Bruce Momjian                          |  830 Blythe Avenue
maillist@candle.pha.pa.us              |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  (610) 353-9879(w)
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  (610) 853-3000(h)

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Massimo Dal Zotto
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] keeping track of connections
Next
From: Doug Lo
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [GENERAL] Should I run regression tests?