Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMJj_ANoo5VrHXdJQr4tPj_QJAHzbzMv-AtxVsoG3pueqg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 20.09.2011 11:18, Simon Riggs wrote: >> >> The bgwriter avoids I/O, if it is operating correctly. This patch >> ensures it continues to operate even during heavy checkpoints. So it >> helps avoid extra I/O during a period of very high I/O activity. > > I don't see what difference it makes which process does the I/O. If a > write() by checkpointer process blocks, any write()s by the separate > bgwriter process at that time will block too. If the I/O is not saturated, > and the checkpoint write()s don't block, then even without this patch, the > bgwriter process can handle its usual bgwriter duties during checkpoint just > fine. (And if the I/O is not saturated, it's not an I/O bound system > anyway.) Whatever value you assign to the bgwriter, then this patch makes sure that happens during heavy fsyncs. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: