On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <swm@linuxworld.com.au> writes:
> > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> What?
>
> > The discussion Simon is refering to came up during the 8.0 beta IIRC. The
> > problem was that we were not allocating xlogs quickly enough under
> > heavy workloads and there was some discussion about the bgwriter taking
> > over this task since it could assess the need for new xlogs more often.
>
> Huh? The bgwriter already has this task, since it runs checkpoints.
>
> It's possible that we ought to allow more "slop" in the number of
> prealloc'd xlog segments --- I think that the current code is probably
> too enthusiastic about deleting "extra" segments after a spike in
> activity subsides. But I don't see the point of moving the
> responsibility somewhere else.
I guess I was recalling this part of the earlier thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2004-07/msg01088.php
Thanks,
Gavin
