Re: Chronic performance issue with Replication Failover and FSM.

From: Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Chronic performance issue with Replication Failover and FSM.
Date: 2012-03-14 02:39:24
Message-ID: CAAZKuFZeq__fbbss8pVWhq=_XdLjmON9U5BFQ+EmyjKdEuinbw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:>
> If it's really a high-UPDATE workload, wouldn't autovacuum start soon?

Also, while vacuum cleanup records are applied, could not the standby
also update its free space map, without having to send the actual FSM
updates? I guess that's bogging down of another variety.

--
fdr

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2012-03-14 03:18:59 Re: wal_buffers, redux
Previous Message Tatsuo Ishii 2012-03-14 02:29:44 Too many IO?