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

Re: CommitDelay performance improvement

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: CommitDelay performance improvement
Date: 2001-02-23 22:18:19
Message-ID: 883.982966699@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers) writes:
>> Comments?  What should the threshold N be ... or do we need to make
>> that a tunable parameter?

> Once you make it tuneable, you're stuck with it.  You can always add
> a knob later, after somebody discovers a real need.

If we had a good idea what the default level should be, I'd be willing
to go without a knob.  I'm thinking of a default of about 5 (ie, at
least 5 other active backends to trigger a commit delay) ... but I'm not
so confident of that that I think it needn't be tunable.  It's really
dependent on your average and peak transaction lengths, and that's
going to vary across installations, so unless we want to try to make it
self-adjusting, a knob seems like a good idea.

A self-adjusting delay might well be a great idea, BTW, but I'm trying
to be conservative about how much complexity we should add right now.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Vince VielhaberDate: 2001-02-23 22:23:01
Subject: Re: regression test form
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-02-23 22:10:07
Subject: Re: Commit delay (was Re: beta5 packages)

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