Re: postgresql latency & bgwriter not doing its job
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: postgresql latency & bgwriter not doing its job |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6599.1409421040@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: postgresql latency & bgwriter not doing its job (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: postgresql latency & bgwriter not doing its job
Re: postgresql latency & bgwriter not doing its job |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 2014-08-27 19:23:04 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> A long time ago, Itagaki Takahiro wrote a patch sort the buffers and write >> them out in order (http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20070614153758.6A62.ITAGAKI.TAKAHIRO@oss.ntt.co.jp). >> The performance impact of that was inconclusive, but one thing that it >> allows nicely is to interleave the fsyncs, so that you write all the buffers >> for one file, then fsync it, then next file and so on. > ... > So, *very* clearly sorting is a benefit. pg_bench alone doesn't convince me on this. The original thread found cases where it was a loss, IIRC; you will need to test many more than one scenario to prove the point. Also, it does not matter how good it looks in test cases if it causes outright failures due to OOM; unlike you, I am not prepared to just "wave away" that risk. A possible compromise is to sort a limited number of buffers ---- say, collect a few thousand dirty buffers then sort, dump and fsync them, repeat as needed. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: