Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Christopher Browne wrote: > > A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hideyuki > > Kawashima) wrote: > >> I appreciate your great suggestion! > >> It is great honor for me if Sigres will be merged to PostgreSQL. > >> Since the changes of Sigres from PostgreSQL-8.2.1 are not many, > >> and moreover, all of changes are surrounded with #ifdef SIGRES --- #endif, > >> incorporating Sigres into PostgreSQL would be easy. > > > > You should consider submitting a patch for this against CVS HEAD. > > > > And actually, I'd think it a better idea to define a GUC variable and > > use that to control whether Sigres is active or not. > > > > At the more sophisticated end of the spectrum, you might set things up > > so that it could be activated/deactivated at runtime by a superuser. > > > > At the less sophisticated end, it might need to be configured in > > postgresql.conf... > > Whatever happen with this?
I would like to see more analysis about why Sigres is faster than an in-memory file system. I think the idea was that locking was reduced but I am unclear on why locking is different in the two cases. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
