Re: wal_level=archive gives better performance than minimal - why?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Greg Smith
Тема Re: wal_level=archive gives better performance than minimal - why?
Дата
Msg-id 4F14A649.5060501@2ndQuadrant.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на wal_level=archive gives better performance than minimal - why?  (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
Ответы Re: wal_level=archive gives better performance than minimal - why?  (Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>)
Список pgsql-performance
On 01/12/2012 06:17 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> I've run a series fo pgbench benchmarks with the aim to see the effect
> of moving the WAL logs to a separate drive, and one thing that really
> surprised me is that the archive log level seems to give much better
> performance than minimal log level.

How repeatable is this?  If you always run minimal first and then
archive, that might be the actual cause of the difference.  In this
situation I would normally run this 12 times, with this sort of pattern:

minimal
minimal
minimal
archive
archive
archive
minimal
minimal
minimal
archive
archive
archive

To make sure the difference wasn't some variation on "gets slower after
each run".  pgbench suffers a lot from problems in that class.

--
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com


В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Greg Smith
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: auto vacuum, not working?
Следующее
От: Tomas Vondra
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: wal_level=archive gives better performance than minimal - why?