From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: checkpoint_timeout |
Date: | 2005-03-23 04:34:03 |
Message-ID: | 200503230434.j2N4Y4Z25476@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Greg Stark wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>
> > I don't see something that happens every five minutes as any kind of
> > performance problem. I am not sure what Josh saw that made him want to
> > increase that.
>
> I would have thought checkpoint_timeout would be something you would adjust
> depending on whether you want even performance (set it low and live with
> redundant i/o) or maximum throughput (set it high and live with i/o spikes and
> performance dropouts). Does that make sense?
>
> I suspect the origin of this meme might be with those benchmark graphs that
> were being posted here that had the checkpoint timeout set to 30m. That seems
> to be a bogus setting that's just hiding some of the i/o by postponing it
> until after the test ends.
Right, I can see shortening it before we had the trickle writer, but for
lengthening it, I don't see you are going to get that much improved
throughput.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2005-03-23 04:38:13 | Re: postgres oracle emulation question |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-03-23 04:23:15 | Re: checkpoint_timeout |