Re: Backport of fsync queue compaction

Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mar jun 19 17:39:46 -0400 2012:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > In January of 2011 Robert committed 7f242d880b5b5d9642675517466d31373961cf98
> > to try and compact the fsync queue when clients find it full.  There's no
> > visible behavior change, just a substantial performance boost possible in
> > the rare but extremely bad situations where the background writer stops
> > doing fsync absorption.  I've been running that in production at multiple
> > locations since practically the day it hit this mailing list, with backports
> > all the way to 8.3 being common (and straightforward to construct).  I've
> > never seen a hint of a problem with this new code.
>
> I've been in favor of back-porting this for a while, so you'll get no
> argument from me.

+1. I even thought we had already backported it and was surprised to
discover we hadn't, when we had this problem at a customer, not long
ago.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support