| From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Robert Treat" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Press Release review comments |
| Date: | 2007-12-14 21:10:27 |
| Message-ID: | 87d4t9rni4.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
"Robert Treat" <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> Simon, have you tested async_commit performance with any of the the beta
> releases? I was involved in a conversation on irc the other day that had
> some anecdotale reports that async_commit was not giving significant speed
> benfits, perhaps as a result of the other tuning and work that has gone into
> the release later in the development cycle. I've not had chance to verify
> this info, so I was wondering if you had.
It depends a lot on your workload. If you have many parallel connections
keeping the i/o controller busy you might not see much change. Alternately if
you have large updates then the 5-15ms waiting for fsync may make little
impact.
Where it helps a lot is on workloads like simple web applications which flood
the server with tons of short updates on a handful of connections.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's On-Demand Production Tuning
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Page | 2007-12-14 21:27:16 | Re: Press Release review comments |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-12-14 20:56:30 | Re: Press Release review comments |