Re: Checkpoint versus Background Writer - Mailing list pgsql-novice

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Checkpoint versus Background Writer
Date
Msg-id 28364.1388276006@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Checkpoint versus Background Writer  (Sergey Konoplev <gray.ru@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-novice
Sergey Konoplev <gray.ru@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Shiv Sharma
> <shiv.sharma.1835@gmail.com> wrote:
>> They seem to do similar things: clear dirty buffers from shared_buffers to
>> disk.
>>
>> So why have 2 processes with seperate semantics (seperate set of config
>> partms) ?

> AFAIU, they serve for completely different purposes.

We used to have a single process trying to serve both purposes, but
it didn't work tremendously well, because the criteria for when to
flush buffers are so different.

            regards, tom lane


pgsql-novice by date:

Previous
From: Sergey Konoplev
Date:
Subject: Re: Checkpoint versus Background Writer
Next
From: Sameer Kumar
Date:
Subject: Query on v9.3 Architecture independent Streaming