Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
Cc: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer
Date: 2011-09-20 14:13:41
Message-ID: 4E789F95.8070300@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 20.09.2011 16:49, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Isn't there also the advantage of that work put in two different
> processes can use two different CPU cores? Or is that likely to never
> ever come in play here?

You would need one helluva I/O system to saturate even a single CPU,
just by doing write+fsync.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-09-20 14:28:28 Re: Back-branch releases upcoming this week
Previous Message Marti Raudsepp 2011-09-20 14:12:48 Re: WIP: Collecting statistics on CSV file data