| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Hackers (PostgreSQL)" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Excessive WAL generation and related performance issue |
| Date: | 2014-04-15 21:13:10 |
| Message-ID: | 3933.1397596390@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> writes:
> In other words, based on my inserted logic, it appears that there are
> 5 and 6 backup blocks on a fairly regular basis.
> However in xlog.h it says:
> 8<--------------------------
> * If we backed up any disk blocks with the XLOG record, we use flag
> * bits in xl_info to signal it. We support backup of up to 4 disk
> * blocks per XLOG record.
> 8<--------------------------
> So is my logic to record number of backup blocks wrong, or is the
> comment wrong, or am I otherwise misunderstanding something?
The comment is correct, so you did something wrong. From memory,
there's a goto-label retry loop in that function; maybe you need
to zero your counters after the retry label?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-04-15 21:15:37 | Re: Excessive WAL generation and related performance issue |
| Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2014-04-15 20:53:29 | Re: Excessive WAL generation and related performance issue |