| From: | "tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Fujii Masao' <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size |
| Date: | 2020-08-21 03:08:44 |
| Message-ID: | TYAPR01MB2990FBA54A06A0A2D39C5FAEFE5B0@TYAPR01MB2990.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
From: Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>
> Just idea; it may be worth exposing the number of when new WAL file is
> created and zero-filled. This initialization may have impact on
> the performance of write-heavy workload generating lots of WAL. If this
> number is reported high, to reduce the number of this initialization,
> we can tune WAL-related parameters so that more "recycled" WAL files
> can be hold.
Sounds good. Actually, I want to know how much those zeroing affected the transaction response times, but it may be the target of the wait event statistics that Imai-san is addressing.
(I wonder how the fallocate() patch went that tries to minimize the zeroing time.)
Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-08-21 03:22:56 | Re: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size |
| Previous Message | tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com | 2020-08-21 02:53:42 | RE: New statistics for tuning WAL buffer size |