Re: [PERFORM] DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>, Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au>, Harold A. Giménez <harold.gimenez@gmail.com>
Date: 2012-07-16T19:46:07Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers, pgsql-performance
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Yes, it seems to have done just that.  The comment for
> ForwardFsyncRequest is a few bricks short of a load too:
> ...
> Line 2 seems to have been mechanically changed from "background
> writer" to "checkpointer", but of course it should still say
> "background writer" in this case.

Yeah, found that one already (it's probably my fault).

Will see about fixing the stats in a separate patch.  I just wanted to
know if the issue had been dealt with in some non-obvious fashion.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Scan the buffer pool just once, not once per fork, during relation drop.