Re: patch to allow disable of WAL recycling

On 07/10/2018 01:15 PM, Jerry Jelinek wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who took the time to look at the patch and send me
> feedback.  I'm happy to work on improving the documentation of this
> new tunable to clarify when it should be used and the implications.
> I'm trying to understand more specifically what else needs to be done
> next. To summarize, I think the following general concerns were
> brought up.
>
> For #6, there is no feasible way for us to recreate our workload on
> other operating systems or filesystems. Can anyone expand on what
> performance data is needed?
>

I think a simple way to prove this would be to run BenchmarkSQL against
PostgreSQL in a default configuration with pg_xlog/pg_wal on a
filesystem that is COW (zfs) and then run another test where
pg_xlog/pg_wal is patched with your patch and new behavior and then run
the test again. BenchmarkSQL is a more thorough benchmarking tool that
something like pg_bench and is very easy to setup.

The reason you would use a default configuration is because it will
cause a huge amount of wal churn, although a test with a proper wal
configuration would also be good.

Thanks,

JD

--
Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc
*** A fault and talent of mine is to tell it exactly how it is. ***
PostgreSQL centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Learn: https://postgresconf.org
***** Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own. *****