| From: | Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Meskes <Michael(dot)Meskes(at)usa(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] performance test |
| Date: | 1999-01-20 02:04:39 |
| Message-ID: | 36A539B7.D34341F0@krs.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Meskes wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 19, 1999 at 10:27:50AM +0700, Vadim Mikheev wrote:
> > You've seen disadvantages of our unperfect buffer manager -:)
> > When server need in buffer for new data comming and there is
> > no unused buffers in pool (i.e. - all buffers filled with new
> > data and marked as dirty), server gets some dirty buffer,
> > writes it AND FSYNC file. So, server does many fsyncs
> > even with BEGIN/END while should do _one_ fsync at COMMIT.
> >
> > Having this problem fixed you wouldn't had so big difference
> > between -F and BEGIN/END-no-F.
>
> I see. But without BEGIN/END a huge difference remains to be expected,
> doesn't it?
Of 'course! Two fsync per commit...
Vadim
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1999-01-20 02:40:44 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: BSDI 3.1 -> BSDI 4.0 performance degradation;(h |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 1999-01-20 00:49:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: BSDI 3.1 -> BSDI 4.0 performance degradation;(h |