Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible

From: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible
Date: 2023-01-14 08:48:52
Message-ID: 628b07b79743e2614ab1724f516cbd41560d6551.camel@j-davis.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, 2022-12-26 at 14:20 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Please review the attached v2 patch further.

I'm still unclear on the performance goals of this patch. I see that it
will reduce syscalls, which sounds good, but to what end?

Does it allow a greater number of walsenders? Lower replication
latency? Less IO bandwidth? All of the above?

--
Jeff Davis
PostgreSQL Contributor Team - AWS

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 2023-01-14 09:19:10 Re: backup.sgml typo
Previous Message Tom Lane 2023-01-14 07:55:37 Re: BF animal malleefowl reported an failure in 001_password.pl