Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three
Date: 2010-11-30 16:27:04
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> How much is "quite a lot"?  Do we have any real reason to think that
>> this solution is unacceptable performance-wise?
> Well, let's imagine a 1GB insert-only table.  It has 128K pages.  If
> you XLOG setting the bit on each page, you'll need to write 128K WAL
> records, each containing a 12-byte relfilenode and a 4-byte block
> offset, for a total of 16 bytes of WAL per page, thus 2MB of WAL.
> But you did just dirty a gigabyte of data.

Oh, but it's worse than that.  When you XLOG a WAL record for each of
those pages, you're going to trigger full-page writes for all of them.
 So now you've turned 1GB of data to write into 2+ GB of data to

Robert Haas
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-11-30 16:27:30
Subject: Re: crash-safe visibility map, take three
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-11-30 16:25:19
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] column-level update privs + lock table

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group