Re: moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it! - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!
Date
Msg-id 4B750193020000250002F22D@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Re: moving pg_xlog -- yeah, it's worth it!  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-performance
Hannu Krosing  wrote:

> Can it be, that each request does at least 1 write op (update
> session or log something) ?

Well, the web application connects through a login which only has
SELECT rights; but, in discussing a previous issue we've pretty well
established that it's not unusual for a read to force a dirty buffer
to write to the OS.  Perhaps this is the issue here again.  Nothing
is logged on the database server for every request.

> If you can, set
>
> synchronous_commit = off;
>
> and see if it further increases performance.

I wonder if it might also pay to make the background writer even more
aggressive than we have, so that SELECT-only queries don't spend so
much time writing pages.  Anyway, given that these are replication
targets, and aren't the "database of origin" for any data of their
own, I guess there's no reason not to try asynchronous commit.
Thanks for the suggestion.

-Kevin



pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca
Date:
Subject: Immutable table functions
Next
From: Yeb Havinga
Date:
Subject: Re: Immutable table functions