On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Why do you think that doing this for all XLogFlush() callsites might > be problematic?
Well, consider the one in the background writer, for example. That's just a periodic flush, so I see no benefit in having it acquire the lock and then wait some more. It already did wait. And what about the case where we're flushing while holding WALInsertLock because the buffer's full? Clearly waiting is useless in that case - nobody can join the group commit for exactly the same reason that we're doing the flush in the first place: no buffer space. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
