Re: Checkpoint question
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Checkpoint question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3094.1137057337@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Checkpoint question (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Tom Lane wrote: >>> It'd be possible to do something like this: after establishing >>> RedoRecPtr, make one quick pass through the buffers and make a list of >>> what needs to be dumped at that instant. Then go back and do the actual >>> I/O for only those buffers. > To compile the list, you'd need to stop all buffer write activity while > you compile it, which sounds a high price for the benefit. Not really --- I was only thinking of narrowing the window for "extra" writes to get in, not removing the window entirely. Don't need any sort of global lock for that. But I agree with your analysis that the extra cycles won't save much in practice. The objection I see is that two lock cycles on each targeted buffer are a nontrivial expense in SMP machines. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: