Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: checkpointer continuous flushing
Date
Msg-id 20160119170459.GC10447@awork2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: checkpointer continuous flushing  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
Responses Re: checkpointer continuous flushing  (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2016-01-19 13:34:14 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> 
> >synchronous_commit = off does make a significant difference.
> 
> Sure, but I had thought about that and kept this one...

But why are you then saying this is fundamentally limited to 160
xacts/sec?

> I think I found one possible culprit: I automatically wrote 300 seconds for
> checkpoint_timeout, instead of 30 seconds in your settings. I'll have to
> rerun the tests with this (unreasonnable) figure to check whether I really
> get a regression.

I've not seen meaningful changes in the size of the regression between 30/300s.

> Other tests I ran with "reasonnable" settings on a large (scale=800) db did
> not show any significant performance regression, up to know.

Try running it so that the data set nearly, but not entirely fit into
the OS page cache, while definitely not fitting into shared_buffers. The
scale=800 just worked for that on my hardware, no idea how it's for yours.

That seems to be the point where the effect is the worst.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: exposing pg_controldata and pg_config as functions
Next
From: Anastasia Lubennikova
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.