Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dave Page
Тема Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results
Дата
Msg-id 1109.62.136.241.62.1044302805.squirrel@ssl.vale-housing.co.uk
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results  (Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca>)
Ответы Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
 Rod Taylor allegedly said:
>> I modified the test program slightly to improve the consistency
>> checks. The updated version is attached.
>
> For curiosity sake, I've compiled it and am running it on FreeBSD with
> soft-updates enabled.
>
> A few variable declarations needed to be bumped up to the top of their
> respective function.

I've been doing a fair bit of C++ recently...

> Any change of tossing in a periodic VACUUM or would that throw off the
> results?

Dunno, Tom could best answer that, but a *complete guess* based on piecing
together tidbits of how it all works from various threads here, would be
that it would merely increase the time period during which a powerfail
would be unlikely to cause duplicate rows. Reasoning for this is that
vacuum would be messing with tuples that are already dead.
Please correct me if I'm wrong :-)

Regards, Dave.




В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "Dave Page"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Win32 Powerfail testing - results
Следующее
От: Joe Conway
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: new procedural language - PL/R