From: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <jim(at)nasby(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Dirty pages in freelist cause WAL stuck |
Date: | 2006-12-28 12:13:37 |
Message-ID: | 20061228121337.GQ71246@nasby.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 05:53:06PM +0900, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
> "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Another connected thought is the idea of a having a FullBufferList - the
> > opposite of a free buffer list. When VACUUM/INSERT/COPY fills a block we
> > notify the buffer manager that this block needs writing ahead of other
> > buffers, so that the bgwriter can work more effectively. That seems like
> > it would help with both this current patch and the additional thoughts
> > above.
>
> Do you mean that bgwriter should take care of buffers in freelist, not only
> ones in the tail of LRU? We might need activity control of bgwriter. Buffers
> are reused rapidly in VACUUM or bulk insert, so bgwriter is not sufficient
> if its settings are same as usual.
Actually, if I understand the code, the "LRU" stuff actually only hits
the free list. Also, the only thing that runs the clock sweep (which is
what maintains the LRU-type info) is a backend requesting a page and not
finding one on the free list.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-12-28 12:25:10 | Re: effective_cache_size vs units |
Previous Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2006-12-28 11:35:52 | Re: Load distributed checkpoint |