Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD
Тема Re: Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching
Дата
Msg-id 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961EB3@m0114.s-mxs.net
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Proposed LogWriter Scheme, WAS: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching  ("Curtis Faith" <curtis@galtair.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
> > Keep in mind that we support platforms without O_DSYNC.  I am not
> > sure whether there are any that don't have O_SYNC either, but I am
> > fairly sure that we measured O_SYNC to be slower than fsync()s on
> > some platforms.

This measurement is quite understandable, since the current software
does 8k writes, and the OS only has a chance to write bigger blocks in the
write+fsync case. In the O_SYNC case you need to group bigger blocks yourself.
(bigger blocks are essential for max IO)

I am still convinced, that writing bigger blocks would allow the fastest
solution. But reading the recent posts the solution might only be to change
the current "loop foreach dirty 8k WAL buffer write 8k" to one or two large
write calls.

Andreas


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [SQL] [GENERAL] CURRENT_TIMESTAMP
Следующее
От: "Shridhar Daithankar"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [GENERAL] Large databases, performance