Horton

Re: measuring lwlock-related latency spikes

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-04-02T21:25:46Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Add new files to NLS file lists

On Apr 2, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Seems like basically what you've proven is that this code path *is* a
> performance issue, and that we need to think a bit harder about how to
> avoid doing the fsync while holding locks.

Hmm, good idea. I wonder if we couldn't just hand off the fsync request to the background writer, as we do with buffer fsync requests.  AFAICS we don't need the fsync to happen right away; the next checkpoint cycle should be soon enough.

...Robert