> > sleep(3) should conform to POSIX specification, if anyone has the
> > reference they can check it to see what the effect of sleep(0)
> > should be.
>
> Yes, but Posix also specifies sched_yield() which rather explicitly
> allows a process to yield its timeslice. No idea how well that is
>
> * Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001117 11:23]:
> > > > sleep(3) should conform to POSIX specification, if anyone has the
> > > > reference they can check it to see what the effect of sleep(0)
> > > > should be.
> > >
> > > Yes, but Posix also specifies sched_yield() which rather explicit
> > sleep(3) should conform to POSIX specification, if anyone has the
> > reference they can check it to see what the effect of sleep(0)
> > should be.
>
> Yes, but Posix also specifies sched_yield() which rather explicitly
> allows a process to yield its timeslice. No idea how well that is
>
> * Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001116 14:02]:
> > > > This sounds like an interesting approach, yes.
> > > Question: Is sleep(0) guaranteed to at least give up control?
> > >
> > > The way I read my UnixWare 7's man page, it might not, since alarm(0)
> > > just cancels the alarm...
> >
> * Don Baccus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001116 13:46]:
> > At 02:13 PM 11/16/00 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >
> > >> I think the default should probably be no delay, and the documentation
> > >> on enabling this needs to be clear and obvious (i.e. hard to miss).
> > >
> > >I just talked to Tom Lane
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > > > Earlier, Vadim was talking about arranging to share fsyncs of the WAL
> > > > log file across transactions (after writing your commit record to the
> > > > log, sleep a few milliseconds to see if anyone else fsyncs before you
> > > > do; if
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > Earlier, Vadim was talking about arranging to share fsyncs of the WAL
> > log file across transactions (after writing your commit record to the
> > log, sleep a few milliseconds to see if anyone else fsyncs before you
> > do; if not, issue the
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I have to agree with Alfred here: this does not sound like a feature,
> >> it sounds like a horrid hack. You're giving up *all* consistency
> >> guarantees for a performance gain that is really going to be pretty
> >> minimal in the WAL context.
>
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> I have to agree with Alfred here: this does not sound like a feature,
> >> it sounds like a horrid hack. You're giving up *all* consistency
> >> guarantees for a performance gain that is really going to be pretty
> >> minimal in the WAL context.
>
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Not really, I thought an ack on a commit would mean that the data
> >> is actually in stable storage, breaking that would be pretty bad
> >> no?
>
> > The default is to sync on commit, but we need to give people options of
> > several seconds delay
> * Tatsuo Ishii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001110 18:42] wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, though we can change this. We also can implement now
> > > feature that Bruce wanted so long and so much -:) -
> > > fsync log not on each commit but each ~ 5sec, if
> > > losing some recent commits is acceptable.
> >
>
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > > > > New CHECKPOINT command.
> > > > > Auto removing of offline log files and creating new file
> > > > > at checkpoint time.
> >
> > Can you tell me how to use CHECKPOINT please?
>
> You shouldn't normally use it - postmaster will start bac
12 matches
Mail list logo
