From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | "'webb sprague'" <wsprague(at)o1(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | RE: WAL Log using all my disk space! |
Date: | 2001-04-27 22:03:42 |
Message-ID: | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D33E0@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
> I just put a CHECKPOINT command on both sides of my COPY
> statement, and it seemed to go quite a bit faster and not
Hmm, why would COPY be faster just after CHECKPOINT.
I assume this was caused by some fortuity (like preparing
new log file at checkpoint time - server does it even if
wal_files = 0 but current log file is 75% full).
> give me any problems. Does that make sense?
Of couse. Also remember
> > Third - unfortunately (from my POV), we requires two checkpoint in
> > log files now, so we do not remove files with records between last
> > two checkpoints.
Some additional CPKT-s may be required.
BUT, I forgot about fourth point - server logs *entire* data pages on first
after last CPKT page modification. It doesn't affect COPY-ed tables (when
first
row goes to new page just this row will be logged) but may affect indices
and UPDATE/DELETE ops.
So, one should be very careful when using CPKT-s.
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | webb sprague | 2001-04-27 22:47:30 | Diagnostic |
Previous Message | Steve Wolfe | 2001-04-27 22:02:42 | Killing ALL of the postmasters |