Re: shared_buffers advice
От | Alvaro Herrera |
---|---|
Тема | Re: shared_buffers advice |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20100316214903.GH3037@alvh.no-ip.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: shared_buffers advice (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: shared_buffers advice
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Tom Lane escribió: > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > > Maybe it would make more sense to try to reorder the fsync calls > > instead. > > Reorder to what, though? You still have the problem that we don't know > much about the physical layout on-disk. Well, to block numbers as a first step. However, this reminds me that sometimes we take the block-at-a-time extension policy too seriously. We had a customer that had a performance problem because they were inserting lots of data to TOAST tables, causing very frequent extensions. I kept wondering whether an allocation policy that allocated several new blocks at a time could be useful (but I didn't try it). This would also alleviate fragmentation, thus helping the physical layout be more similar to logical block numbers. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: