Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: >> The idea that thousands of Postgres installations are slower just >> so we can occasionally debug xmin/xmax issues seems way off >> balance to me. > > There's no evidence whatsoever that the scope of the problem is > that large. Well, are we agreed that the current approach means that insertion of a heap tuple normally requires it to be written to disk three times, with two of those WAL-logged? And that deletion of a tuple generally requires the same? I'd say that constitutes prima facie evidence that any PostgreSQL installation doing any significant number of writes is slower because of this. Are you suggesting there aren't thousands of such installations, or that the repeated disk writes are generally free? -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
