On 12/3/21, 5:57 AM, "Bharath Rupireddy" <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 3:01 AM Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/1/21, 6:48 PM, "Bharath Rupireddy" <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > +1 for the overall idea of making the checkpoint faster. In fact, we
>> > here at our team have been thinking about this problem for a while. If
>> > there are a lot of files that checkpoint has to loop over and remove,
>> > IMO, that task can be delegated to someone else (maybe a background
>> > worker called background cleaner or bg cleaner, of course, we can have
>> > a GUC to enable or disable it). The checkpoint can just write some
>>
>> Right. IMO it isn't optimal to have critical things like startup and
>> checkpointing depend on somewhat-unrelated tasks. I understand the
>> desire to avoid adding additional processes, and maybe it is a bigger
>> hammer than what is necessary to reduce the impact, but it seemed like
>> a natural solution for this problem. That being said, I'm all for
>> exploring other ways to handle this.
>
> Having a generic background cleaner process (controllable via a few
> GUCs), which can delete a bunch of files (snapshot, mapping, old WAL,
> temp files etc.) or some other task on behalf of the checkpointer,
> seems to be the easiest solution.
>
> I'm too open for other ideas.
I might hack something together for the separate worker approach, if
for no other reason than to make sure I really understand how these
functions work. If/when a better idea emerges, we can alter course.
Nathan