Re: Handing off SLRU fsyncs to the checkpointer

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jakub Wartak <Jakub(dot)Wartak(at)tomtom(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Handing off SLRU fsyncs to the checkpointer
Date: 2020-08-26 05:20:59
Message-ID: 20200826052059.hvscf7ndf7g4673q@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2020-08-26 15:58:14 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > --12.51%--compactify_tuples
> > PageRepairFragmentation
> > heap2_redo
> > StartupXLOG
>
> I wonder if there is something higher level that could be done to
> reduce the amount of compaction work required in the first place, but
> in the meantime I'm very happy if we can improve the situation so much
> with such a microscopic improvement that might eventually benefit
> other sorting stuff...

Another approach could be to not perform any sorting during recovery,
instead including enough information in the WAL record to avoid doing a
full blown PageRepairFragmentation during recovery.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2020-08-26 06:07:30 Re: display offset along with block number in vacuum errors
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2020-08-26 04:38:52 Re: some unused parameters cleanup