| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Backport of fsync queue compaction |
| Date: | 2012-06-19 21:39:46 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobRk=wb3zSuj7-QPSuNQ+JnM4NB4neR2uB9+fnWDmWsyQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> In January of 2011 Robert committed 7f242d880b5b5d9642675517466d31373961cf98
> to try and compact the fsync queue when clients find it full. There's no
> visible behavior change, just a substantial performance boost possible in
> the rare but extremely bad situations where the background writer stops
> doing fsync absorption. I've been running that in production at multiple
> locations since practically the day it hit this mailing list, with backports
> all the way to 8.3 being common (and straightforward to construct). I've
> never seen a hint of a problem with this new code.
I've been in favor of back-porting this for a while, so you'll get no
argument from me.
Anyone disagree?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-06-19 21:42:27 | Re: use of int4/int32 in C code |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-06-19 21:39:10 | Re: [PATCH 10/16] Introduce the concept that wal has a 'origin' node |