Bruce Momjian wrote:
> jao@geophile.com wrote:
>
>>4. I understand that a "background writer" is being contemplated for
>>7.5. Will that replace or augment the checkpoint process? Any
>>comments on how that work will apply to my problem would be
>>appreciated. I wouldn't mind seeing the average performance,
>>(without the spikes) go up -- let's say -- 10%, in exchange for
>>more uniform performance. These spikes are a real problem.
>
>
> The background writer is designed to address your specific problem. We
> will stil checkpoint, but the spike should be greatly minimized.
>
Thanks. Do you know when 7.5 is expected to be released?
Until then, is a workaround known? Also, are the delays I'm seeing out of the ordinary?
I'm looking at one case in which two successive transactions, each updating a handful of
records, take 26 and 18 *seconds* (not msec) to complete. These transactions normally complete
in under 30 msec.
Jack Orenstein
