From: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Streaming replication on win32, still broken |
Date: | 2010-02-18 10:39:26 |
Message-ID: | 3f0b79eb1002180239g2443e3b3qd8657c2662415c42@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 7:04 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> O_DIRECT helps us when we're not going to read the file again, because
>> we don't waste cache on it. If we are, which is the case here, it
>> should be really bad for performance, since we actually have to do a
>> physical read.
>>
>> Incidentally, that should also apply to general WAL when archive_mdoe
>> is on. Do we optimize for that?
>
> Hmm, no we don't. We do take that into account so that we refrain from
> issuing posix_fadvice(DONTNEED) if archive_mode is on, but we don't
> disable O_DIRECT. Maybe we should..
Since the performance of WAL write is more important than that of WAL
archiving in general, that optimization might offer little benefit.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-02-18 11:14:15 | Re: Streaming replication and unfit messages |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-02-18 10:31:01 | Re: Streaming replication and unfit messages |