Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8807.1282158479@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this? (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem --
anyone remember this?
Re: Return of the Solaris vacuum polling problem -- anyone remember this? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: >> Rather, what you need to be thinking about is how >> come vacuum seems to be making lots of pages dirty on only one of these >> machines. > This is an anti-wraparound vacuum, so it could have something to do with > the hint bits. Maybe it's setting the freeze bit on every page, and > writing them one page at a time? That would explain all the writes, but it doesn't seem to explain why your two servers aren't behaving similarly. > Still don't understand the call to pollsys, even so, though. Most likely that's the libc implementation of the select()-based sleeps for vacuum_cost_delay. I'm still suspicious that the writes are eating more cost_delay points than you think. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: