"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
> I think Tom's right... the OS blocksize is smaller than BLCKSZ, so
> reducing the size might help with a very high transaction load when
> commits are required very frequently. At checkpoint it sounds like we
> might benefit from a large WAL blocksize be
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 20:51:54 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 12:22 -0800, Mark Wong wrote:
>
> > I was hoping that in the case where 2 or more data blocks are written to
> > the log that they could written once within a single larger log block.
> > The log bl
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 12:22 -0800, Mark Wong wrote:
> I was hoping that in the case where 2 or more data blocks are written to
> the log that they could written once within a single larger log block.
> The log block size must be larger than the data block size, of course.
I think Tom's right...
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Overall, the two things are fairly separate, apart from the fact that we
> do currently log whole data blocks straight to the log. Usually just
> one, but possibly 2 or three. So I have a feeling that things would
> become less efficient if you did this, no
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 19:37:07 +
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 08:21 -0800, Mark Wong wrote:
>
> > I've been wondering if there might be anything to gain by having a
> > separate block size for logging and data. I thought I might try
> > defining DATA_BLCKSZ an
On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 08:21 -0800, Mark Wong wrote:
> I've been wondering if there might be anything to gain by having a
> separate block size for logging and data. I thought I might try
> defining DATA_BLCKSZ and LOG_BLCKSZ and see what kind of trouble I get
> myself into.
>
> I wasn't able to
On 3/16/06, Mark Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been wondering if there might be anything to gain by having aseparate block size for logging and data. I thought I might trydefining DATA_BLCKSZ and LOG_BLCKSZ and see what kind of trouble I getmyself into.
If you're going to try it out, here'
Hi all,
I've been wondering if there might be anything to gain by having a
separate block size for logging and data. I thought I might try
defining DATA_BLCKSZ and LOG_BLCKSZ and see what kind of trouble I get
myself into.
I wasn't able to find any previous discussion but pehaps 'separate
BLKSZ'
