Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18
Date: 2016-03-10 23:30:37
Message-ID: 20160310233037.ozdeg6cxsuxak36c@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-03-11 00:23:56 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> As you wish. I thought that understanding the underlying performance model
> with sequential writes written in chunks is important for the admin, and as
> this guc would have an impact on performance it should be hinted about,
> including the limits of its effect where large bases will converge to random
> io performance. But maybe that is not the right place.

I do agree that that's something interesting to document somewhere. But
I don't think any of the current places in the documentation are a good
fit, and it's a topic much more general than the feature we're debating
here. I'm not volunteering, but a good discussion of storage and the
interactions with postgres surely would be a significant improvement to
the postgres docs.

- Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-03-11 00:32:15 Re: pgsql: Provide much better wait information in pg_stat_activity.
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2016-03-10 23:23:56 Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18