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

Re: problems with new vacuum (??)

From: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: problems with new vacuum (??)
Date: 2002-01-02 21:09:14
Message-ID: 3C3376FA.1060102@tm.ee (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

>Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> writes:
>
>>Have you any ideas how to distinguish between interactive and
>>non-interactive disk I/O coming from postgresql backends ?
>>
>
>I don't see how.  For one thing, the backend that originally dirtied
>a buffer is not necessarily the one that writes it out.  Even assuming
>that we could assign a useful priority to different I/O requests,
>how do we tell the kernel about it?  There's no portable API for that
>AFAIK.
>
>One thing that would likely help a great deal is to have the WAL files
>on a separate disk spindle, but since what I've got is a one-disk
>system, I can't test that on this PC.
>
If you have enough memory you can put WAL files on a RAM disk for testing :)

It is totally to the countrary of their intended use, but could reveal 
something
interesting while testing

----------------
Hannu



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-01-02 21:09:36
Subject: Re: Bulkloading using COPY - ignore duplicates?
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-01-02 18:40:32
Subject: Re: problems with new vacuum (??)

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