From: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: buffercache/bgwriter |
Date: | 2011-03-28 06:02:42 |
Message-ID: | 4D902482.9010705@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On 03/24/2011 05:19 AM, Uwe Bartels wrote:
> It would also be good to see how many buffers were written by backend
> processes grouped by Buffer Access Strategy - to better distinguish
> evil backend writes from wanted backend writes.
Since all these writes are being cached by the operating system, which
strategy writes them out isn't that useful to track. The only really
"evil" type of writes are ones where the background writer doesn't
absorb the fsync calls and the backends have to do that themselves. And
as of V9.1, that is something you can distinguish in pg_stat_bgwriter
(and it's also less likely to happen, too)
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
"PostgreSQL 9.0 High Performance": http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2011-03-28 06:17:45 | Re: Xeon twice the performance of opteron |
Previous Message | Joshua Berkus | 2011-03-26 01:03:17 | Re: Shouldn't we have a way to avoid "risky" plans? |