Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kuntal Ghosh
Тема Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention
Дата
Msg-id CAGz5QCLzG+ctOTp+TLv_r=jv_RQY67qvWVct_cFPTuWbYLgxGQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 4:57 PM, jasrajd <jasrajd@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> We are also seeing contention on the walwritelock and repeated writes to the
>> same offset if we move the flush outside the lock in the Azure environment.
>> pgbench doesn't scale beyond ~8 cores without saturating the IOPs or
>> bandwidth. Is there more work being done in this area?
>
> As of now, there is no patch in the development queue for Postgres 11
> that is dedicated to this particularly lock contention. There is a
> patch for LWlocks in general with power PC, but that's all:
> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/14/984/
>
> Not sure if Kuntal has plans to submit again this patch. It is
> actually a bit sad to not see things moving on and use an approach to
> group flushes.
As of now, I've no plans to re-submit the patch. Actually, I'm not
sure what I should try next. I would love to get some advice/direction
regarding this.



-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Kuntal Ghosh
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention
Следующее
От: Amit Langote
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Pluggable storage