Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: WAL prefetch (another approach)
Date: 2020-08-06 02:58:44
Message-ID: CA+hUKGKfsWj+4qPfOkC4YtYtVO33yrCty1uWxBp3R1OSqWEcyA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:47 AM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 03:09:29PM +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> >FYI I am still trying to reproduce and understand the problem Tomas
> >reported; more soon.
>
> Any luck trying to reproduce thigs? Should I try again and collect some
> additional debug info?

No luck. I'm working on it now, and also trying to reduce the
overheads so that we're not doing extra work when it doesn't help.

By the way, I also looked into recovery I/O stalls *other* than
relation buffer cache misses, and created
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/29/2669/ to fix what I found. If
you avoid both kinds of stalls then crash recovery is finally CPU
bound (to go faster after that we'll need parallel replay).

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2020-08-06 03:22:13 Re: FailedAssertion("pd_idx == pinfo->nparts", File: "execPartition.c", Line: 1689)
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-08-06 02:50:06 Re: Add MAIN_RELATION_CLEANUP and SECONDARY_RELATION_CLEANUP options to VACUUM