| From: | Jinliang Zheng <alexjlzheng(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Question about RWF_DONTCACHE |
| Date: | 2025-06-15 15:13:58 |
| Message-ID: | TYZPR01MB61695DDBCC198BC806CAF6F9A171A@TYZPR01MB6169.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, everyone
I am writing to ask if the recently introduced RWF_DONTCACHE [0] (originally named RWF_UNCACHE) in the Linux kernel will be or is already supported by PostgreSQL?
I am not sure if RWF_DONTCACHE will improve PostgreSQL performance. In fact, I think it may even degrade performance. Has anyone tested this?
[0] https://lwn.net/ml/all/20241203153232(dot)92224-2-axboe(at)kernel(dot)dk/
Thanks, everyone.
Jinliang Zheng :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-06-15 16:05:56 | Re: Slot's restart_lsn may point to removed WAL segment after hard restart unexpectedly |
| Previous Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2025-06-15 15:00:01 | Re: Slot's restart_lsn may point to removed WAL segment after hard restart unexpectedly |