Re: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Curtis Faith <curtis(at)galtair(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pgsql-Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Potential Large Performance Gain in WAL synching
Date: 2002-10-04 15:48:33
Message-ID: 200210041548.g94FmXx06991@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Curtis Faith wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > I may be missing something here, but other backends don't block while
> > one writes to WAL.
>
> I don't think they'll block until they get to the fsync or XLogWrite
> call while another transaction is fsync'ing.
>
> I'm no Unix filesystem expert but I don't see how the OS can
> handle multiple writes and fsyncs to the same file descriptors without
> blocking other processes from writing at the same time. It may be that
> there are some clever data structures they use but I've not seen huge
> praise for most of the file systems. A well written file system could
> minimize this contention but I'll bet it's there with most of the ones
> that PostgreSQL most commonly runs on.
>
> I'll have to write a test and see if there really is a problem.

Yes, I can see some contention, but what does aio solve?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-04 15:49:31 Re: Return of INSTEAD rules
Previous Message Greg Copeland 2002-10-04 15:44:48 Re: Threaded Sorting