Re: double-buffering page writes
От | ITAGAKI Takahiro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: double-buffering page writes |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20081023105338.B715.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | double-buffering page writes (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: double-buffering page writes
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote: > I'm trying to see if it makes sense to do the double-buffering of page > writes before going further ahead with CRC checking. I came up with the > attached patch; it does the double-buffering inconditionally, because as > it was said, it allows releasing the io_in_progress lock (and resetting > BM_IO_IN_PROGRESS) early. I have some comments about the double-buffering: - Are there any performance degradation because of addtional memcpy? 8kB of memcpy seems not to be free. - Is it ok to allocale dblbuf[BLCKSZ] as local variable? It might be unaligned. AFAICS we avoid such usages in other places. - It is the best if we can delay double-buffering until locks are conflicted actually. But we might need to allocale shadowbuffers from shared buffers instead of local memory. - Are there any other modules that can share in the benefits of double-buffering? For example, we could avoid avoid waitingfor LockBufferForCleanup(). It is cool if the double-buffering can be used for multiple purposes. Regards, --- ITAGAKI Takahiro NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: