Background writer committed
От | Jan Wieck |
---|---|
Тема | Background writer committed |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3FBB991B.5010402@Yahoo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
unsubscribe
Re: Background writer committed Re: Background writer committed |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I committed the first part of the background writer process. We had a consensus on attempting to avoid write() calls from regular backends, but did no come to any conclusions what to do to force the kernel to actually do some IO. Consequently, this patch is a separate process launched by postmaster, that periodically write()'s out "some" dirty buffers in LRU order. This causes the buffers returned for replacement (when a backend needs to read in a page) to be clean allways. The process does no sync(), fsync() or any other calls thus far. Nothing has changed in the checkpoint logic either. The configuration options controlling the process are all PGC_SIGHUP: # - Background writer - #bgwriter_delay = 200 # 10-5000 milliseconds #bgwriter_percent = 1 # 0-100% of dirty buffers #bgwriter_maxpages = 100 # 1-1000 buffers max at once Delay is the number of milliseconds to wait between loops. If there was nothing to do at all in one loop (all buffers clean), then the process will sleep for 10 seconds. Percent is the percentage of "dirty pages" to write per loop. This is independant of the size of the buffer pool. If percent = 0 the postmaster will not start the process at all. Maxpages is an upper bound to prevent the background writer from producing a write storm if a sequential operation causes all pages of a large buffer pool to be dirtied at once. Jan -- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: