Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18

Hello Andres,

>> I'm not sure I've seen these performance... If you have hard evidence,
>> please feel free to share it.
>
> Man, are you intentionally trying to be hard to work with?

Sorry, I do not understand this remark.

You were refering to some latency measures in your answer, and I was just
stating that I was interested in seeing these figures which were used to
justify your choice to keep a shared writeback context.

I did not intend this wish to be an issue, I was expressing an interest.

> To quote the email you responded to:
>
>> My current plan is to commit this with the current behaviour (as in
>> this week[end]), and then do some actual benchmarking on this specific
>> part. It's imo a relatively minor detail.

Good.

From the evidence in the thread, I would have given the per tablespace
context the preference, but this is just a personal opinion and I agree
that it can work the other way around.

I look forward to see these benchmarks later on, when you have them.

So all is well, and hopefully will be even better later on.

--
Fabien.