Jack Orenstein wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > jao@geophile.com wrote:
> >
> >>4. I understand that a "background writer" is being contemplated for
> >>7.5. Will that replace or augment the checkpoint process? Any
> >>comments on how that work will apply to my problem would be
> >>appreciated. I wouldn't mind seeing the average performance,
> >>(without the spikes) go up -- let's say -- 10%, in exchange for
> >>more uniform performance. These spikes are a real problem.
> >
> >
> > The background writer is designed to address your specific problem. We
> > will stil checkpoint, but the spike should be greatly minimized.
> >
>
> Thanks. Do you know when 7.5 is expected to be released?
3-6 months.
> Until then, is a workaround known? Also, are the delays I'm seeing out of the ordinary?
> I'm looking at one case in which two successive transactions, each updating a handful of
> records, take 26 and 18 *seconds* (not msec) to complete. These transactions normally complete
> in under 30 msec.
Wow. Others might know the answer to that.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073