Re: WAL Performance Improvements

From: Helge Bahmann <bahmann(at)math(dot)tu-freiberg(dot)de>
To: pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Janardhana Reddy <jana-reddy(at)mediaring(dot)com(dot)sg>
Subject: Re: WAL Performance Improvements
Date: 2002-02-26 17:31:49
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0202261809070.692-100000@lothlorien.stunet2.tu-freiberg.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> AFAICS the only real win that can be gotten with a change like
> Janardhana's would be to avoid writing multiple blocks in the case
> where the filesystem block size is smaller than the xlog's BLCKSZ.
> Tuning this correctly would require knowing the kernel's block size.
> Anyone have ideas about a portable way to find that out?

I have been thinking for quite some time now that it would be a cool
project to turn Postgres into using aio_(read|write) + O_DIRECT instead of
read|write + fsync; in that case the caller gets to control the blocksize
within the limits permitted by the hardware, and Janardhana's optimization
could safely be applied.

Regards
--
Helge Bahmann <bahmann(at)math(dot)tu-freiberg(dot)de> /| \__
Network admin, systems programmer /_|____\
_/\ | __)
$ ./configure \\ \|__/__|
checking whether build environment is sane... yes \\/___/ |
checking for AIX... no (we already did this) |

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-02-26 17:45:52 Re: Implementation Proposal For Add Free Behind Capability
Previous Message Amit Kumar Khare 2002-02-26 17:30:32 Re: Implementation Proposal For Add Free Behind Capability For Large Sequential Scan

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jonathan Eisler 2002-02-26 17:35:54 psql domains
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-02-26 16:48:53 Re: WAL Performance Improvements