Re: Configuring PostgreSQL to minimize impact of checkpoints

Jack Orenstein wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > jao(at)geophile(dot)com wrote:
> >
> >>4. I understand that a "background writer" is being contemplated for
> >>7.5. Will that replace or augment the checkpoint process? Any
> >>comments on how that work will apply to my problem would be
> >>appreciated. I wouldn't mind seeing the average performance,
> >>(without the spikes) go up -- let's say -- 10%, in exchange for
> >>more uniform performance. These spikes are a real problem.
> >
> >
> > The background writer is designed to address your specific problem. We
> > will stil checkpoint, but the spike should be greatly minimized.
> >
>
> Thanks. Do you know when 7.5 is expected to be released?

3-6 months.

> Until then, is a workaround known? Also, are the delays I'm seeing out of the ordinary?
> I'm looking at one case in which two successive transactions, each updating a handful of
> records, take 26 and 18 *seconds* (not msec) to complete. These transactions normally complete
> in under 30 msec.

Wow. Others might know the answer to that.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073