Re: checkpoint patches - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: checkpoint patches
Date
Msg-id 4F7F03D2.5040309@2ndQuadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: checkpoint patches  (Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 04/05/2012 02:23 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> If there's a fundamental flaw in how linux deals with heavy writes that
> means you can't rely on certain latency windows, perhaps we should be
> looking at using a different OS to test those cases...

Performance under this sort of write overload is something that's been a 
major focus of more recent Linux kernel versions than I've tested yet. 
It may get better just via the passage of time.  Today is surely far 
improved over the status quo a few years ago, when ext3 was the only 
viable filesystem choice and tens of seconds could pass with no activity.

The other thing to recognize here is that some heavy write operations 
get quite a throughput improvement from how things work now, with VACUUM 
being the most obvious one.  If I retune Linux to act more like other 
operating systems, with a smaller and more frequently flushed write 
cache, it will trash VACUUM write performance in the process.  That's 
one of the reasons I submitted the MB/s logging to VACUUM for 9.2, to 
make it easier to measure what happens to that as write cache changes 
are made.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: pg_stat_statements normalisation without invasive changes to the parser (was: Next steps on pg_stat_statements normalisation)
Next
From: Noah Misch
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Support for foreign keys with arrays