Re: Spread checkpoint sync
От | Rob Wultsch |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Spread checkpoint sync |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTi=g8S7+kW23OcUZb_xGYhgEG_Q=T7XeWd=aMbFU@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Spread checkpoint sync (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Spread checkpoint sync
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> >> If you fsync() a file with one dirty page in it, it's going to return very >> quickly, but a 1GB file will take a while. That could be problematic if you >> have a thousand small files and a couple of big ones, as you would want to >> reserve more time for the big ones. I'm not sure what to do about it, maybe >> it's not a problem in practice. > > It's a problem in practice allright, with the bulk-loading situation being > the main one you'll hit it. If somebody is running a giant COPY to populate > a table at the time the checkpoint starts, there's probably a 1GB file of > dirty data that's unsynced around there somewhere. I think doing anything > about that situation requires an additional leap in thinking about buffer > cache evicition and fsync absorption though. Ultimately I think we'll end > up doing sync calls for relations that have gone "cold" for a while all the > time as part of BGW activity, not just at checkpoint time, to try and avoid > this whole area better. That's a lot more than I'm trying to do in my first > pass of improvements though. > > In the interest of cutting the number of messy items left in the official > CommitFest, I'm going to mark my patch here "Returned with Feedback" and > continue working in the general direction I was already going. Concept > shared, underlying patches continue to advance, good discussion around it; > those were my goals for this CF and I think we're there. > > I have a good idea how to autotune the sync spread that's hardcoded in the > current patch. I'll work on finishing that up and organizing some more > extensive performance tests. Right now I'm more concerned about finishing > the tests around the wal_sync_method issues, which are related to this and > need to get sorted out a bit more urgently. > > -- > Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD > PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support www.2ndQuadrant.us > Forgive me, but is all of this a step on the slippery slope to direction io? And is this a bad thing? -- Rob Wultsch wultsch@gmail.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: