Re: pg_standby and build farm

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Doug Knight" <dknight(at)wsi(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_standby and build farm
Date: 2006-12-28 13:40:44
Message-ID: 1167313244.3633.98.camel@silverbirch.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 2006-12-27 at 20:09 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:

> The reason for the -m option was performance. Recovery is I/O-bound,
> with 50% of the CPU it does use coming from IsRecordValid() - which is
> where the CRC checking takes place. (I can add an option to recover
> without CRC checks, if anyone wants it, once I've rejigged the option
> parsing for recovery.conf.)

Make that 70% of the CPU, for long running recoveries, but the CPU only
gets as high as 20% on my tests, so still I/O bound.

> Should be able to use hard links, i.e. ln -f -s /archivepath/%f %p
> instead. I'll test that tomorrow then issue a new version.

The ln works, and helps, but not that much. I'll remove the -m option
and replace it with an -l option. Must be careful to use the -f option.

The majority of the I/O comes from writing dirty buffers, so enabling
the bgwriter during recovery would probably be more helpful.

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2006-12-28 13:41:57 Re: Recent SIGSEGV failures in buildfarm HEAD
Previous Message Jim C. Nasby 2006-12-28 12:25:10 Re: effective_cache_size vs units