From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au>, Harold A(dot) Giménez <harold(dot)gimenez(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |
Date: | 2012-07-17 23:48:50 |
Message-ID: | CAEYLb_WBjrhRPuMgnUGHvXdp+VOaRKxbJ0_vYooemMQKx=QjHA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On 17 July 2012 23:56, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> This implies that nobody has done pull-the-plug testing on either HEAD
> or 9.2 since the checkpointer split went in (2011-11-01), because even
> a modicum of such testing would surely have shown that we're failing to
> fsync a significant fraction of our write traffic.
>
> Furthermore, I would say that any performance testing done since then,
> if it wasn't looking at purely read-only scenarios, isn't worth the
> electrons it's written on. In particular, any performance gain that
> anybody might have attributed to the checkpointer splitup is very
> probably hogwash.
>
> This is not giving me a warm feeling about our testing practices.
The checkpointer slit-up was not justified as a performance
optimisation so much as a re-factoring effort that might have some
concomitant performance benefits. While I agree that it is regrettable
that this was allowed to go undetected for so long, I do not find it
especially surprising that some performance testing results post-split
didn't strike somebody as fool's gold. Much of the theory surrounding
checkpoint tuning, if followed, results in relatively little work
being done during the sync phase of a checkpoint, especially if an I/O
scheduler like deadline is used.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Farina | 2012-07-17 23:49:39 | Re: Using pg_upgrade on log-shipping standby servers |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2012-07-17 23:39:15 | Re: BUG #6733: All Tables Empty After pg_upgrade (PG 9.2.0 beta 2) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2012-07-18 00:13:19 | Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-17 22:56:50 | Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |