Re: Group Commit
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Group Commit |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 15081.1176159139@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Group Commit (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Group Commit
Re: Group Commit |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes: > I've been working on the patch to enhance our group commit behavior. The > patch is a dirty hack at the moment, but I'm settled on the algorithm > I'm going to use and I know the issues involved. One question that just came to mind is whether Simon's no-commit-wait patch doesn't fundamentally alter the context of discussion for this. Aside from the prospect that people won't really care about group commit if they can just use the periodic-WAL-sync approach, ISTM that one way to get group commit is to just make everybody wait for the dedicated WAL writer to write their commit record. With a sufficiently short delay between write/fsync attempts in the background process, won't that net out at about the same place as a complicated group-commit patch? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: