| From: | Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Master-slave visibility order |
| Date: | 2013-08-29 22:10:40 |
| Message-ID: | CA+CSw_uM=VFMio2s8VBki3QqvKxxEmFbzUpmc0h6FUth8Lgc9g@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 12:33 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> FWIW, WAL is still the major bottleneck for INSERT heavy workloads. The
> per CPU overhead actually minimally increased (at least in my tests), it
> just scales noticeably better than before.
Interesting. Do you have any insight what is behind the CPU overhead?
Maybe the solution is to make WAL insertion cheap enough to not
matter. That won't be easy, but neither are the alternatives.
Regards,
Ants Aasma
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-08-29 22:16:32 | Re: Variadic aggregates vs. project policy |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-08-29 22:04:59 | Re: PL/pgSQL PERFORM with CTE |