Re: CLOG contention - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: CLOG contention
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMJrPrgeaGV-o-jutM53VpUFSySiP-eOWGVrGUWA0B=rcA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: CLOG contention  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: CLOG contention
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:57 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

> I think that the reason it's historically been a constant is that the
> original coding took advantage of having a compile-time-constant number
> of buffers --- but since we went over to the common SLRU infrastructure
> for several different logs, there's no longer any benefit whatever to
> using a simple constant.

You astound me, you really do.

Parameterised slru buffer sizes were proposed about for 8.3 and opposed by you.

I guess we all reserve the right to change our minds...

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: FATAL: bogus data in lock file "postmaster.pid": ""
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: CLOG contention