[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: (ITS#5391) hdb deadlock
Hallvard B Furuseth wrote:
> firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
>> One thing that I've started doing recently in my configs is to skip
>> the #bytes option (leave it zero), so that only time-based checkpoints
>> occur. Since they're done in a dedicated task, only one thread at a
>> time can trigger a checkpoint.
> How about making #bytes-based checkpoints signal or (pthread_kill?) the
> timed checkpoints thread, so that thread can handle all checkpoints?
It's an interesting idea. But that means we have to count bytes ourselves,
rather than letting BerkeleyDB do it. And that's rather difficult, since we
don't know the actual volume of writes resulting from a given operation.
Personally I don't think byte counts are very useful here. They're made
somewhat superfluous because the data volume will tend to cause the
transaction log buffers to fill up and be flushed regardless.
-- Howard Chu
Chief Architect, Symas Corp. http://www.symas.com
Director, Highland Sun http://highlandsun.com/hyc/
Chief Architect, OpenLDAP http://www.openldap.org/project/