Re: [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint" |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.64.0712072138270.10014@westnet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint" (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint"
Re: [DOCS] "distributed checkpoint" |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Simon Riggs wrote: > "Smoothed" makes a lot of sense for me. We used to have a checkpoint > spike, now we don't. To be accurate, there used to be a huge and unavoidable spike, now there's a control that aims to make it smaller. The problem hasn't completely gone away yet. With that in mind, let me start over. Here's what's in the release notes right now: "Distributed checkpoints prevent I/O spikes during checkpoints" It's good this came up, because that is factually wrong; while the average case is much better some OS-dependant aspects of the spike (what happens at fsync) are certainly still there. I think it's easier to rewrite this whole thing so it's technically accurate rather than a simple fix of the wording, something like this: "Checkpoint writes can be spread over a longer time period to smooth the I/O spike during each checkpoint" It's got spread, it's got smooth, and if I could have worked "silky" in there too I would have. -- * Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: