From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Paul Guo <pguo(at)pivotal(dot)io> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Two fsync related performance issues? |
Date: | 2020-09-10 11:40:22 |
Message-ID: | CA+hUKG+oPhL4KCWqavPpdXZ-r0dmxZJSBLhfkGcfJOk6iN1cwQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 3, 2020 at 12:09 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:43 PM Paul Guo <pguo(at)pivotal(dot)io> wrote:
> > RecreateTwoPhaseFile(gxact->xid, buf, len);
> I hadn't previously focused on this second part of your email. I
> think the fsync() call in RecreateTwoPhaseFile() might be a candidate
> for processing by the checkpoint code through the new facilities in
> sync.c, which effectively does something like what you describe. Take
I looked at this more closely and realised that I misunderstood; I was
thinking of a problem like the one that was already solved years ago
with commit 728bd991c3c4389fb39c45dcb0fe57e4a1dccd71. Sorry for the
noise.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | torikoshia | 2020-09-10 11:53:53 | Re: Get memory contexts of an arbitrary backend process |
Previous Message | vignesh C | 2020-09-10 11:21:22 | Re: Improvements in Copy From |