Re: heap_sync seems rather oblivious to partitioned tables(wal_level=minimal) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: heap_sync seems rather oblivious to partitioned tables(wal_level=minimal)
Date
Msg-id 20180928031259.GD1500@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: heap_sync seems rather oblivious to partitioned tables (wal_level=minimal)  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: heap_sync seems rather oblivious to partitioned tables(wal_level=minimal)  (Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Re: heap_sync seems rather oblivious to partitioned tables (wal_level=minimal)  (David Rowley <david.rowley@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 02:46:30PM +1200, David Rowley wrote:
> I don't agree that we can skip explaining why one of the optimisations
> can't be applied just because we've explained why a similar
> optimisation cannot be applied somewhere close by.  I think that the
> WAL/FSM optimisation can fairly easily be improved on and probably
> fixed in PG12 as we can just lazily determine per-partition if it can
> be applied to that partition or not.

Have you guys looked at what the following patch does for partitions and
how it interacts with it?
https://commitfest.postgresql.org/19/528/

The proposed patch is missing the point that documentation also mentions
the optimizations for COPY with wal_level = minimal:
   <para>
    <command>COPY</command> is fastest when used within the same
    transaction as an earlier <command>CREATE TABLE</command> or
    <command>TRUNCATE</command> command. In such cases no WAL
    needs to be written, because in case of an error, the files
    containing the newly loaded data will be removed anyway.
    However, this consideration only applies when
    <xref linkend="guc-wal-level"/> is <literal>minimal</literal> as all commands
    must write WAL otherwise.
   </para>
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kato, Sho"
Date:
Subject: RE: Performance of the partitioning in the large scale
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Segfault when creating partition with a primary key and sql_droptrigger exists