Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Tom Lane wrote: >> This argument supposes that the bgwriter will do nothing while the COPY >> is proceeding.
> It will clean buffers ahead of the COPY, but it won't write the buffers > COPY leaves behind since they have usage_count=1. Yeah, and they don't *need* to be written until the clock sweep has passed over them once. I'm not impressed with the idea of writing buffers because we might need them someday; that just costs extra I/O due to re-dirtying in too many scenarios. (Note that COPY per se will not trigger this behavior anyway, since it will act in a limited number of buffers because of the recent buffer access strategy patch.) regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster