From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
---|---|
To: | "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: bgwriter changes |
Date: | 2004-12-14 15:54:45 |
Message-ID: | 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA40184D271@m0114.s-mxs.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> (2) Remove bgwriter_percent. I have yet to hear anyone argue that
> there's an actual need for bgwriter_percent in tuning
> bgwriter behavior,
One argument for it is to avoid writing very hot pages.
> (3) Change the meaning of bgwriter_percent, per Simon's proposal. Make
> it mean "the percentage of the buffer pool to scan, at most, to look for
> dirty buffers". I don't think this is workable, at least not at this
a la long I think we want to avoid that checkpoint needs to do a lot of
writing, without writing hot pages too often. This can only reasonably be
defined with a max number of pages we want to allow dirty at checkpoint time.
bgwriter_percent comes close to this meaning, although in this sense the value
would need to be high, like 80%.
I think we do want 2 settings. Think of one as a short time value
(so bgwriter does not write everything in one run) and one a long term
target over multiple runs.
Is it possible to do a patch that produces a dirty buffer list in LRU order
and stops early when eighter maxpages is reached or bgwriter_percent
pages are scanned ?
Andreas
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2004-12-14 16:09:20 | Re: V8.0rc1 On AIX. |
Previous Message | Brad Nicholson | 2004-12-14 15:51:37 | V8.0rc1 On AIX. |