(2013/06/12 23:07), Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> On 10 June 2013 11:51, KONDO Mitsumasa <kondo.mitsumasa@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>>> I create patch which is improvement of checkpoint IO scheduler for stable
>>> transaction responses.
>>
>> Looks like good results, with good measurements. Should be an
>> interesting discussion.
>
> +1.
>
> I suspect we want to poke at the algorithms a little here and maybe
> see if we can do this without adding new GUCs. Also, I think this is
> probably two separate patches, in the end. But the direction seems
> good to me.
Thank you for comment!
I separate my patch in checkpoint-wirte and in checkpoint-fsync. As you
say, my patch has a lot of new GUCs. I don't think it cannot be decided
automatic. However, it is difficult that chekpoint-scheduler is suitable
for all of enviroments which are like virtual server, public cloude server,
and embedded server, etc. So I think that default setting parameter works
same as before. Setting parameter is primitive and difficult, but if we can
set correctly, it is suitable for a lot of enviroments and will not work
unintended action.
I try to take something into consideration about less GUCs version. And if you
have good idea, please discussion about this!
Best Regards,
--
Mitsumasa KONDO
NTT Open Source Software Center