Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my server
От
Greg Smith
Тема
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server
Дата
Msg-id
4B5123A7.7080606@2ndquadrant.com
Ответ на
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server (Eduardo Piombino)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Andy Colson <andy@squeakycode.net>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Craig James <craig_james@emolecules.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Matthew Wakeling <matthew@flymine.org>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler@timbira.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Pierre Frédéric Caillaud<lists@peufeu.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Craig Ringer <craig@postnewspapers.com.au>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Eduardo Piombino <drakorg@gmail.com>
Re: a heavy duty operation on an "unused" table kills my
server Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>
Eduardo Piombino wrote: > But already knowing that the base system (i.e. components out of pg's > control, like OS, hardware, etc) may be "buggy" or that it can fail in > rationalizing the IO, maybe it would be nice to tell to whoever is > responsible for making use of the IO subsystem (pg_bg_writer?), to use > it in a moderately manner. That is ... This operation is not critical, > please do not trash my system because it is not necessary. Use all the > delays you would like, go slowly, please, I don't really care if you > take a month. Or at least, be aware of current status of the IO > system. If it is being busy, slow down, if it is free, speed up. Of > course I won't care if it takes less time to complete. There are three problems here: 1) The background writer does not have a central role in the I/O of the system, and even if it did that would turn into a scalability issue. Clients initiate a lot of work on their own, and it's not so easy to actually figure out where to put a limiter at given that. 2) PostgreSQL aims to be cross-platform, and writing something that adjusts operations based on what the OS is doing requires a lot of OS-specific code. You end up needing to write a whole new library for every platform you want to support. 3) Everyone who is spending money/time improving PostgreSQL has things they think are more important to work on than resource limiters, so there's just not anybody working on this. Your request is completely reasonable and there are plenty of uses for it. It's just harder than it might seem to build. One day we may find someone with money to spend who can justify sponsoring development in this area because it's a must-have for their PostgreSQL deployment. I assure you that any number of people reading this list would be happy to quote out that job. But right now, there is no such sponsor I'm aware of. That means the best we can do is try and help people work around the issues they do run into in the most effective way possible, which in your case has wandered into this investigation of your underlying disk subsystem. It's not that we don't see that an alternate approach would make the problem go away, the code needed just isn't available, and other project development work (like the major replication advance that was just committed today) are seen as more important. -- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support greg@2ndQuadrant.com www.2ndQuadrant.com
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления
От: Greg Smith
Дата: