Horton

Re: [HACKERS] lseek/read/write overhead becomes visible at scale ..

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Tobias Oberstein <tobias.oberstein@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-04-25T18:41:44Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 2:13 AM, Andrew Gierth
<andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> wrote:
> The code that detects sequential behavior can not distinguish between
> pread() and lseek+read, it looks only at the actual offset of the
> current request compared to the previous one for the same fp.
>
>  Thomas> +1 for adopting pread()/pwrite() in PG12.
>
> ditto

Likewise.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Commits

  1. Use pg_pread() and pg_pwrite() for data files and WAL.

  2. Perform less setup work for AFTER triggers at transaction start.