Horton

Re: remove more archiving overhead

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2022-02-24T21:48:53Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
I tested this again with many more WAL files and a much larger machine
(r5d.24xlarge with data directory on an NVMe SSD instance store volume).
As before, I am using a bare-bones archive module that does nothing but
return true.  Without the patch, archiving ~120k WAL files took about 109
seconds.  With the patch, it took around 62 seconds, which amounts to a
~43% reduction in overhead.

-- 
Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com

Commits

  1. Be more prescriptive in new doc about re-archiving of same WAL file.

  2. doc: Add note about re-archiving of same WAL files in docs.

  3. Reduce overhead of renaming archive status files.