Re: more anti-postgresql FUD - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: more anti-postgresql FUD
Date
Msg-id 1160762746.31966.251.camel@dogma.v10.wvs
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: more anti-postgresql FUD  ("Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Fri, 2006-10-13 at 13:52 -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
> On 10/13/06, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> writes:
> > > Is that really true? In theory block n+1 could be half a revolution
> > > after block n, allowing you to commit two transactions per revolution.
> >
> > Not relevant, unless the prior transaction happened to end exactly at a
>
> does full page writes setting affect this?
>

No, full page writes only affects checkpoints.

For a transaction to commit, some bits must hit permanent storage
*somewhere*. If that location is in one general area on disk, you must
either commit several transactions at once (see commit_delay), or you
must wait until the next revolution to get back to that area of the
disk.

Regards,
    Jeff Davis


pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: "J S B"
Date:
Subject: Backup DB not getting connected
Next
From: "Jim C. Nasby"
Date:
Subject: Re: more anti-postgresql FUD