Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24941.1067980253@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes: > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes: >> The main problem with this is knowing which files need to be fsync'd. > Why could the postmaster not just fsync *every* file? You want to find, open, and fsync() every file in the database cluster for every checkpoint? Sounds like a non-starter to me. In typical situations I'd expect there to be lots of files that have no writes during any given checkpoint interval (system catalogs for instance). > I'm assuming fsync syncs writes issued by other processes on the same file, > which isn't necessarily true though. It was already pointed out that we can't rely on that assumption. > Or using aio write ahead as much as you want and then just make checkpoint > block until all the writes are completed. You don't actually need to rush them > at all, just know when they're done. If the objective is to avoid an i/o storm, I don't think this does it. The system could easily delay most of the writes until the next syncer() pass. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: