Re: data on devel code perf dip

From: Mark Wong <markw(at)osdl(dot)org>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, maryedie(at)osdl(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: data on devel code perf dip
Date: 2005-08-12 15:43:10
Message-ID: 200508121542.j7CFgejA017416@smtp.osdl.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 22:11:42 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > >> O_DIRECT is only being used for WAL page writes (or I sure hope so
> > >> anyway), so shared_buffers should be irrelevant.
> >
> > > Uh, O_DIRECT really just enables when open_sync is used, and I assume
> > > that is not used for writing dirty buffers during a checkpoint.
> >
> > I double-checked that O_DIRECT is really just used for WAL, and only
> > when the sync mode is open_sync or open_datasync. So it seems
> > impossible that it affected a run with mode fdatasync. What seems the
> > best theory at the moment is that the grouped-WAL-write part of the
> > patch doesn't work so well as we thought.
>
> Yes, that's my only guess. Let us know if you want the patch to test,
> rather than pulling CVS before and after the patch was applied.

Yeah, a patch would be a little easier. :)

Thanks,
Mark

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2005-08-12 16:12:17 Re: [HACKERS] data on devel code perf dip
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-08-12 14:41:50 Re: CREATE USER and pg_user

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-08-12 15:56:27 Re: Bug in canonicalize_path()
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2005-08-12 15:37:51 Re: Bug in canonicalize_path()