| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WAL Rate Limiting |
| Date: | 2014-01-16 15:47:51 |
| Message-ID: | 52D7FF27.2090801@vmware.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/16/2014 05:39 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-01-16 10:35:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think possibly a more productive approach to this would be to treat
>> it as a session-level GUC setting, rather than hard-wiring it to affect
>> certain commands and not others.
>
> Do you see a reasonable way to implement this generically for all
> commands? I don't.
In suitable safe places, check if you've written too much WAL, and sleep
if so. Call it CHECK_FOR_WAL_BUDGET(), along the lines of
CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS(), but called less frequently. Or maybe
vacuum_delay_point() is a better analogy. Hopefully you don't need to
sprinkle them in too many places to be useful.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-01-16 15:52:57 | Re: WAL Rate Limiting |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-01-16 15:44:19 | Re: Display oprcode and its volatility in \do+ |