Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Sullivan
Subject Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM
Date
Msg-id 20031103144845.GG12457@libertyrms.info
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Nov 02, 2003 at 01:00:35PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> real traction we'd have to go back to the "take over most of RAM for
> shared buffers" approach, which we already know to have a bunch of
> severe disadvantages.

I know there are severe disadvantages in the current implementation,
but are there in-principle severe disadvantages?  Or are you speaking
more generally, like "maintainability of code", "someone has to look
after all that buffering optimisation", "potential for about 10
trillion bugs", &c.?

A

-- 
----
Andrew Sullivan                         204-4141 Yonge Street
Afilias Canada                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info>                              M2P 2A8                                        +1 416 646 3304
x110



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: adding support for posix_fadvise()
Next
From: "Matthew T. O'Connor"
Date:
Subject: Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM