Re: Count backend self-sync calls

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Count backend self-sync calls
Date: 2010-11-14 22:32:34
Message-ID: AANLkTimc4jdP+0z3OpgMHtGKHDLAg9cL6KZeTJxi1VYR@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> The patch also adds some logging to the innards involved here, to help with
> understanding problems in this area.  I don't think that should be in the
> version committed as is.  May want to drop the logging level or make it
> disabled in regular builds, since it is sitting somewhere it generates a lot
> of log data and adds overhead.

I think this one could be removed:

+ if (n > 0)
+ elog(DEBUG1,"Absorbing %d fsync requests",n);

But if this is generating a lot of log data or adding a lot of
overhead, then you have bigger problems anyway:

+ elog(DEBUG1, "Unable to forward fsync request, executing directly");

I'm inclined to change that to an ereport(), but otherwise it seems
OK. Also, how about referring to this as buffers_backend_fsync
consistently throughout, instead of dropping the "f" in some places?

With those changes, I think this is committable, and will do so,
barring objections.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-11-14 23:10:49 Re: Count backend self-sync calls
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-11-14 22:28:09 Re: Refactoring the Type System