Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2015-07-28 22:51:55 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>>> checkpoint continuous flushing
>> This does a big memory allocation at checkpoint, which Tom vehemently
>> objects to.
> Uh. Didn't he just object to failing in that case?
Right. If it can fall back to "stupid" mode when there's not spare
memory, I'd be ok with that.
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
