Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistent memory
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistent memory |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYaRx6c4k2eiRCjBkHLRwvi+5fYjsBJO86L2taU2yxdGw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | RE: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistentmemory ("Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com>) |
Ответы |
RE: [HACKERS][PATCH] Applying PMDK to WAL operations for persistentmemory
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:32 PM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki <tsunakawa.takay@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: > As I showed previously, regular file writes on PCIe flash, *not writes using PMDK on persistent memory*, was 20% fasterwith open_datasync than with fdatasync. If I understand correctly, those results are all just pg_test_fsync results. That's not reflective of what will happen when the database is actually running. When you use open_sync or open_datasync, you force WAL write and WAL flush to happen simultaneously, instead of letting the WAL flush be delayed. > And you said open_datasync was significantly faster than fdatasync. Could you show your results? What device and filesystemdid you use? I don't have the results handy at the moment. We found it to be faster on a database benchmark where the WAL was stored on an NVRAM device. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: