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

Re: BGWriter latch, power saving

From: Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BGWriter latch, power saving
Date: 2012-01-17 12:38:02
Message-ID: CAEYLb_VWfB+v0n6WN76MfP=DNUNBXBK5pVA3j5joEvRt=BxVpw@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 17 January 2012 11:24, Heikki Linnakangas
<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> In the patch I sent, I did rearrange the sleeping logic. I think it's more
> readable the way it is now.

I have no objection to either your refinement of the sleeping logic,
nor that you moved some things in both the existing code and my patch
so that they occur when no spinlock is held.

Should I proceed with a benchmark on V3, so that we can get this
committed? I imagine that a long pgbench-tools run is appropriate,
(after all, it was used to justify the re-write of the BGWriter for
8.3) at various scale factors, from smallish to quite large.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Dimitri FontaineDate: 2012-01-17 13:45:37
Subject: Re: WIP patch for parameterized inner paths
Previous:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2012-01-17 12:33:06
Subject: Re: 9.3 feature proposal: vacuumdb -j #

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