Re: Pre-allocating WAL files
| От | Pavel Borisov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Pre-allocating WAL files |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CALT9ZEG+R9ne6xTyEVSiLhZ7wJAQ1Jq-9XVZs=zbd_jQJyPTdA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Pre-allocating WAL files ("Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn@amazon.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Pre-allocating WAL files
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> pre-allocating during checkpoints. I've done a few pgbench runs, and
> it seems to work pretty well. Initialization is around 15% faster,
> and I'm seeing about a 5% increase in TPS with a simple-update
> workload with wal_recycle turned off. Of course, these improvements
> go away once segments can be recycled.
I've checked the patch v7. It applies cleanly, code is good, check-world tests passed without problems.
I think it's ok to use checkpointer for this and the overall patch can be committed. But the seen performance gain makes me think again before adding this feature. I did tests myself a couple of months ago and got similar results.
Really don't know whether is it worth the effort.
Wish you and all hackers happy New Year!
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: