| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing |
| Date: | 2016-01-20 15:16:24 |
| Message-ID: | 20160120151624.GA298712@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund wrote:
> The relevant thread is at
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoaCr3kDPafK5ygYDA9mF9zhObGp_13q0XwkEWsScw6h%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com
> what I didn't remember is that I voiced concern back then about exactly this:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/201112011518.29964.andres%40anarazel.de
> ;)
Interesting. If we consider for a minute that part of the cause for the
slowdown is slowness in pg_clog, maybe we should reconsider the initial
decision to flush as quickly as possible (i.e. adopt a strategy where
walwriter sleeps a bit between two flushes) in light of the group-update
feature for CLOG being proposed by Amit Kapila in another thread -- it
seems that these things might go hand-in-hand.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2016-01-20 15:19:52 | Re: Proposal for UPDATE: do not insert new tuple on heap if update does not change data |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2016-01-20 14:59:15 | Re: WIP: Failover Slots |