From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | RE: 7.0.3(nofsync) vs 7.1 |
Date: | 2000-12-12 18:30:04 |
Message-ID: | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D31F6@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> >> What is the default commit delay now?
>
> > As before 5 * 10^(-6) sec - pretty the same as sleep(0) -:)
> > Seems CommitDelay is not very useful parameter now - XLogFlush
> > logic and fsync time add some delay.
>
> There was a thread recently about smarter ways to handle shared fsync
> of the log --- IIRC, we talked about self-tuning commit delay,
> releasing waiting processes as soon as someone else had fsync'd, etc.
> Looks like none of those ideas are in the code now. Did you not like
> any of those ideas, or just no time to work on it yet?
We're in beta - it's better to test WAL to find/fix bugs than make
further improvements.
Also, I've run test with 100 clients inserting records into 100 tables
(to minimize contentions) - 915 tps with fsync and 1190 tps without fsync.
So, we do ~ 18 commits per fsync now and probably we'll be able to
increase commit performance by ~ 30%, no more.
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Randy Jonasz | 2000-12-12 18:53:09 | Re: RFC C++ Interface |
Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2000-12-12 18:10:23 | Re: Fwd: Re: HELP! foreign eys & inheritance |