Current WAL Header uses 32 bytes on a 64-bit CPU. It seems possible to
reduce this to 24 bytes, without reducing resilience, when
full_page_writes = off. This will reduce overall WAL volumes by around
5-15%, depending upon the application with performance gains in various
ways.
If
Simon Riggs wrote:
Current WAL Header uses 32 bytes on a 64-bit CPU. It seems possible to
reduce this to 24 bytes, without reducing resilience, when
full_page_writes = off. This will reduce overall WAL volumes by around
5-15%, depending upon the application with performance gains in various
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 14:04 +, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Current WAL Header uses 32 bytes on a 64-bit CPU. It seems possible to
reduce this to 24 bytes, without reducing resilience, when
full_page_writes = off. This will reduce overall WAL volumes by around
5-15%,
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ISTM that we would get the effect your looking for by just moving the
xl_tot_len field to the end, and only storing it for records with backup
blocks:
I like that formulation better --- seems like less
change-for-the-sake-of-change.
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 11:03 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ISTM that we would get the effect your looking for by just moving the
xl_tot_len field to the end, and only storing it for records with backup
blocks:
I like that formulation better ---
