Re: Spread checkpoint sync - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Josh Berkus
Subject Re: Spread checkpoint sync
Date
Msg-id 4CF56561.4030506@agliodbs.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Spread checkpoint sync  (Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> Maybe, but it's hard to argue that the current implementation--just
> doing all of the sync calls as fast as possible, one after the other--is
> going to produce worst-case behavior in a lot of situations.  Given that
> it's not a huge amount of code to do better, I'd rather do some work in
> that direction, instead of presuming the kernel authors will ever make
> this go away.  Spreading the writes out as part of the checkpoint rework
> in 8.3 worked better than any kernel changes I've tested since then, and
> I'm not real optimisic about this getting resolved at the system level. 
> So long as the database changes aren't antagonistic toward kernel
> improvements, I'd prefer to have some options here that become effective
> as soon as the database code is done.

Besides, even if kernel/FS authors did improve things, the improvements
would not be available on production platforms for years.  And, for that
matter, while Linux and BSD are pretty responsive to our feedback,
Apple, Microsoft and Oracle are most definitely not.

--                                  -- Josh Berkus                                    PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
                        http://www.pgexperts.com
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack)
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: KNNGIST next step: adjusting indexAM API