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

Re: problems with new vacuum (??)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
Cc: Barry Lind <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: problems with new vacuum (??)
Date: 2002-01-02 15:56:40
Message-ID: 4304.1009987000@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-01-02 16:09:34
Subject: Re: Duplicate-key-detection failure case found in btree
Previous:From: Matthew T. O'ConnorDate: 2002-01-02 14:49:58
Subject: Re: problems with new vacuum (??)

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