Re: pg_standby and build farm

From: Doug Knight <dknight(at)wsi(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_standby and build farm
Date: 2006-12-28 13:45:40
Message-ID: 1167313540.3933.58.camel@arc-dknightlx.wsicorp.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thanks for the response, Simon. I'm continuing to use your script, so if
there's anything I can help you with (testing, ideas, etc), just let me
know.

Doug

On Thu, 2006-12-28 at 13:40 +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:

> 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.
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jie Zhang 2006-12-28 14:37:34 Re: Bitmap index thoughts
Previous Message Stefan Kaltenbrunner 2006-12-28 13:41:57 Re: Recent SIGSEGV failures in buildfarm HEAD