On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:40, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 10:49, Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah that sounds like a good idea. Shouldn't be too hard to do (will > reuqire a backend patch as well, of course). Should we use "-f" for > fast? Though that may be an unfortunate overload of the usual usecase > for -f, so maybe -c <fast|slow> for "checkpoint fast/slow"?
Was easy, done with "-c <fast|slow>". -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
