Horton

Re: Spread checkpoint sync

Cédric Villemain <cedric.villemain.debian@gmail.com>

View thread
From: Cédric Villemain <cedric.villemain.debian@gmail.com>
To: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-01-18T10:26:51Z
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 buffers_backend_fsync field to pg_stat_bgwriter.

2011/1/18 Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>
>> Should we be writing until 2:30 then sleep 30 seconds and fsync at 3:00?
>>
>
> The idea of having a dead period doing no work at all between write phase
> and sync phase may have some merit.  I don't have enough test data yet on
> some more fundamental issues in this area to comment on whether that smaller
> optimization would be valuable.  It may be a worthwhile concept to throw
> into the sequencing.

Are we able to have some pause without strict rules like 'stop for 30
sec' ? (case : my hardware is very good and I can write 400MB/sec with
no interrupt, XXX IOPS)

I wonder if we are not going to have issue with  "RAID firmware + BBU
+ linux scheduler" because we are adding 'unexpected' behavior in the
middle.

-- 
Cédric Villemain               2ndQuadrant
http://2ndQuadrant.fr/     PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support