Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: WAL performance with wal_sync_method = open_sync

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: WAL performance with wal_sync_method = open_sync
Date: 2001-04-30 05:58:38
Message-ID: 10967.988610318@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> I'm playing with wal parameters and found that wal_sync_method =
> open_sync enormously enhance the performance on my machine. Without it
> (using default fsync) I got only 90 tps at the best using pgbench (-s
> 2). However if I set wal_sync_method = open_sync, I get ~200 tps.

Wouldn't surprise me.  The performance of the fsync method sucks on
my system (HPUX 10.20) as well.  AFAICT HPUX and Linux 2.2.x are not
very smart about fsync on large files --- they scan all the kernel
disk buffers for the target file to find the dirty ones.  O_SYNC
avoids this scanning.

I hear Linux 2.4.* is smarter about doing fsync, so it probably has
fsync as fast or faster than O_SYNC.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-04-30 06:08:01
Subject: Re: Thanks, naming conventions, and count()
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-04-30 05:16:09
Subject: Re: `make depend' broken in CVS sources

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group