| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Spread checkpoint sync |
| Date: | 2011-01-31 17:04:00 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTikN0MJwcfjQjQifvtepXLnhUfB1Nz6d9-=ZWQEW@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> 3. Pause for 3 seconds after every fsync.
>
>> I think something along the lines of #3 is probably a good idea,
>
> Really? Any particular delay is guaranteed wrong.
What I was getting at was - I think it's probably a good idea not to
do the fsyncs at top speed, but I'm not too sure how they should be
spaced out. I agree a fixed delay isn't necessarily right.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-31 17:11:24 | Re: Spread checkpoint sync |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-01-31 17:01:48 | Re: Spread checkpoint sync |