Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints test results
От | Gregory Maxwell |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints test results |
Дата | |
Msg-id | e692861c0706151328g1b7a097j4817042760e9dcc0@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints test results (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints test results
Re: Load Distributed Checkpoints test results |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 6/15/07, Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > While in theory spreading out the writes could have a detrimental effect I > think we should wait until we see actual numbers. I have a pretty strong > suspicion that the effect would be pretty minimal. We're still doing the same > amount of i/o total, just with a slightly less chance for the elevator > algorithm to optimize the pattern. ..and the sort patching suggests that the OS's elevator isn't doing a great job for large flushes in any case. I wouldn't be shocked to see load distributed checkpoints cause an unconditional improvement since they may do better at avoiding the huge burst behavior that is overrunning the OS elevator in any case.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: