On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I think doing this outside of s_b will make stuff rather hard for > physical replication and crash recovery since we either will need to > flush the whole buffer at checkpoints - which is hard since the > checkpointer doesn't work inside individual databases - or we need to > persist the in-memory buffer across restart which also sucks.
You might be right, but I think part of the value of LSM-trees is that the in-memory portion of the data structure is supposed to be able to be optimized for in-memory storage rather than on disk storage. It may be that block-structuring that data bleeds away much of the performance benefit. Of course, I'm talking out of my rear end here: I don't really have a clue how these algorithms are supposed to work. -- 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