| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)surnet(dot)cl> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Why is checkpoint so costly? |
| Date: | 2005-06-21 21:45:32 |
| Message-ID: | 200506211445.32289.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro, Tom,
> bgwriter_delay | 200
> bgwriter_maxpages | 100
> bgwriter_percent | 1
>
> Maybe it should be more aggressive.
Yeah, a bgwriter progression is running now. I don't expect it to make
much difference. Most of sync impact is syncing the FS cache, which the
bgwriter doesn't touch.
> Another thing to blame is the dump-whole-pages-after-checkpoint
> business. Maybe the load you are seeing is not completely during
> checkpoint, but right after it as well. How do you tell from the
> results that the checkpoint is complete?
I can't relate that to the performance numbers, unfortunately. I think
that the paging is probably the cause, but I don't know what to do about
it.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-21 21:49:19 | Re: PROPOSAL FE/BE extension to handle IN/OUT parameters |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-06-21 21:37:15 | Re: Why is checkpoint so costly? |