On 07/19/2012 10:32 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 07/19/2012 10:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan
and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Or we could provide an initdb flag which would set an upper bound on
shared_buffers, and
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In short, then, the background writer process is entirely useless for
any database that fits completely into shared buffers.
Or to phrase that a bit more positively, there's no reason to do a
bunch of unnecessary writes if we
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Or we could provide an initdb flag which would set an upper bound on
shared_buffers, and have make check (at least) use it.
How about a flag that sets the exact value for shared_buffers, rather
than a maximum? I think a
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Or we could provide an initdb flag which would set an upper bound on
shared_buffers, and have make check (at least) use it.
How about a flag that sets the exact value for
On 07/19/2012 10:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Or we could provide an initdb flag which would set an upper bound on
shared_buffers, and have make check (at least) use it.
How about a
After fixing the assorted breakage discussed yesterday, I still wasn't
seeing any ForwardFsyncRequest requests coming from the bgwriter during
a regression test run, which made me wonder if there was yet another
bug. What I find is that because of the recent increase in the
out-of-the-box
On 07/18/2012 03:59 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
2. It's rather disturbing that a fairly large swath of functionality
just stopped getting tested at all by the buildfarm. Do we want to
rethink the shared_buffers increase? Or artificially bloat the
regression database to make it larger than 128MB? Or
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
The buildfarm does have the ability to set config data after initdb has
run (which I just enhanced in the latest release). So a buildfarm owner
could add a config line for shared_buffers which would override what
initdb had set.
Or we could
On 07/18/2012 05:37 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
The buildfarm does have the ability to set config data after initdb has
run (which I just enhanced in the latest release). So a buildfarm owner
could add a config line for shared_buffers which would override
From: pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgsql-hackers-ow...@postgresql.org]
On Behalf Of Tom Lane
So that raises two independent sets of questions:
1. Do we like the fact that the bgwriter isn't doing anything in this
situation? It seems arguably OK for writes to happen only for
10 matches
Mail list logo
