Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> ... It seems unlikely to cause any real
> problem if WAL writer takes a couple seconds to get with the program
> after a long period of inactivity; note that an async commit will kick
> it anyway, and a sync commit will probably half to flush WAL whether
> the WAL writer wakes up or not.
That's a good point. What about only kicking the WAL writer in code
paths where a backend found itself having to write/flush WAL for itself?
The added overhead is very surely negligible in such a situation.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
