Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible
Date: 2023-10-03 23:05:32
Message-ID: 0d84c025e38673cb575dcf4987d050fe7b1e1a1f.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, 2023-01-14 at 12:34 -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> One benefit would be that it'd make it more realistic to use direct
> IO for WAL
> - for which I have seen significant performance benefits. But when we
> afterwards have to re-read it from disk to replicate, it's less
> clearly a win.

Does this patch still look like a good fit for your (or someone else's)
plans for direct IO here? If so, would committing this soon make it
easier to make progress on that, or should we wait until it's actually
needed?

If I recall, this patch does not provide a perforance benefit as-is
(correct me if things have changed) and I don't know if a reduction in
syscalls alone is enough to justify it. But if it paves the way for
direct IO for WAL, that does seem worth it.

Regards,
Jeff Davis

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Karl O. Pinc 2023-10-03 23:15:49 Re: Various small doc improvements; plpgsql, schemas, permissions, oidvector
Previous Message Nico Williams 2023-10-03 23:01:16 Re: Pre-proposal: unicode normalized text