Re: Partitioned checkpointing

> Feel free to do that.  200kB is well below this list's limits.  (I'm not
> sure how easy it is to open .epsf files in today's systems, but .jpg or
> other raster image formats are pretty common.)
Thanks for your comment.

Please find two result graphs (for sync and async commit cases) in .jpg format.
I think it is obvious that performance dips were mitigated in both magnitude and frequency by introducing the
partitionedcheckpointing. 


(In passing) one correction for my previous email.
> Storage: raid1 of 4 HDs (write back assumed using BBU) for $PGDATA/pg_xlog
>          raid1 of 2 SSDs for $PGDATA (other than pg_xlog)
'raid1' is wrong and 'raid0' is correct.
--
Takashi Horikawa
NEC Corporation
Knowledge Discovery Research Laboratories

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alvaro Herrera [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 12:03 AM
> To: Horikawa Takashi(堀川 隆)
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Partitioned checkpointing
>
> Takashi Horikawa wrote:
>
> > # Since I'm not sure whether it is OK to send an email to this mailing
> > with attaching some files other than patch, I refrain now from
> > attaching raw results (200K bytes of text/case) and result graphs in
> > .jpg or .epsf format illustrating the throughput variations to this
> > email. If it is OK, I'm pleased to show the results in those formats.
>
> Feel free to do that.  200kB is well below this list's limits.  (I'm not
> sure how easy it is to open .epsf files in today's systems, but .jpg or
> other raster image formats are pretty common.)
>
> --
> Álvaro Herrera