Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: "Zeugswetter Andreas DAZ SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Bruno Wolff III" <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>, "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "Russell Smith" <mr-russ(at)pws(dot)com(dot)au>, "Postgres Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Checkpoint cost, looks like it is WAL/CRC
Date: 2005-07-08 04:12:41
Message-ID: 8407.1120795961@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> If so, please undo the previous patch (which disabled page dumping
>> entirely) and instead try removing this block of code, starting
>> at about xlog.c line 620 in CVS tip:

> Will do. Results in a few days.

Great. BTW, don't bother testing snapshots between 2005/07/05 2300 EDT
and just now --- Bruce's full_page_writes patch introduced a large
random negative component into the timing ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2005-07-08 04:32:16 Re: User's exception plpgsql
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-07-08 03:44:44 Re: Hmmm 8.1 pg_dumpall cannot dump older db's?