Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Jan Wieck wrote:
>> What doing frequent fdatasync/fsync during a constant ongoing checkpoint
>> will cause is to significantly lower the physical write storm happening
>> at the sync(), which is causing huge problems right now.
>
> I don't see that frankly because sync() is syncing everying on that
> machine, including other file systems. Reducing our own load from sync
> will not help with other applications writing to drives.
You have 4 kids, Bruce. If you buy only two lollypops, how many of them
can share the room unattended?
What I described is absolutely sufficient for a dedicated DB server. We
will be able to coordinate the resources between the various components
of PostgreSQL, no doubt. Everyone who has significant performance
problems because of I/O saturation, and is still keeping other I/O heavy
applications on the same box instead of separating the things, is either
not serious or dumb ... or both.
Jan
PS: I know your kids can, but it serves too well ... ;-)
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
