Re: CommitDelay performance improvement

From: Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CommitDelay performance improvement
Date: 2001-02-24 03:54:12
Message-ID: 3.0.5.32.20010224145412.03240ba0@mail.rhyme.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 14:57 23/02/01 -0800, Nathan Myers wrote:
>
>When thinking about tuning N, I like to consider what are the interesting
>possible values for N:
>

It may have been much earler in the debate, but has anyone checked to see
what the maximum possible gains might be - or is it self-evident to people
who know the code?

Would it be worth considering creating a test case with no flush in
RecordTransactionCommit, and rely on checkpointing to flush? I realize this
is never an option in production, but is it possible to modify the code in
this way? I *should* give an upper limit on the gains that can be made by
flushing at the best possible time.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Philip Warner 2001-02-24 03:56:42 Re: CommitDelay performance improvement
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-02-24 03:10:38 WAL does not recover gracefully from out-of-disk-space