Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes
Date: 2012-04-02 19:35:59
Message-ID: 11583.1333395359@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I suggest we optimise that by moving the dirty block into shared
> buffers and leaving it as dirty. That way we don't need to write or
> fsync at all and the bgwriter can pick up the pieces. So my earlier
> patch to get the bgwriter to clean the clog would be superfluous.

[ blink... ] I think you forgot to mention the massive restructuring
needed to cause clog to become a normal relation that the bgwriter and
shared buffer manager would know what to do with. This might be a good
long-term approach but it's not going to produce any near-term joy.

I note BTW that many years ago, the transaction log *was* a normal
relation file, and the current clog code descends directly from
realizing that that was a bad idea. If memory serves, the killer
problem was that a standard relation file doesn't support truncation
from the front; but there may have been other issues as well.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2012-04-02 19:52:37 Re: libxml related crash on git head
Previous Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2012-04-02 19:31:00 libxml related crash on git head