Re: Background writer underemphasized ...
От | Greg Smith |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Background writer underemphasized ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.GSO.4.64.0804161546310.27404@westnet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Background writer underemphasized ... (Bill Moran <wmoran@collaborativefusion.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Background writer underemphasized ...
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008, Bill Moran wrote: >> bgwriter_delay = 10000ms # 10-10000ms between rounds >> bgwriter_lru_maxpages = 1000 # 0-1000 max buffers written/round > Have you watched closely under load to ensure that you're not seeing a > huge performance hit every 10s when the bgwriter kicks off? bgwriter_lru_maxpages = 1000 means that any background writer pass can write at most 1000 pages = 8MB. Those are buffered writes going into the OS cache, which it will write out at its own pace later. That isn't going to cause a performance hit when it happens. That isn't the real mystery though--where's the RAID5 rant I was expecting from you? -- * Greg Smith gsmith@gregsmith.com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: