Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison
Date
Msg-id 6104.1203702840@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison
Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison
List pgsql-hackers
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> IIRC we were speculating that data was being written
>> in a pattern that required a lot of seeking thus ruining throughput,
>> but we didn't have any hard evidence of that.  Did you do the
>> strace'ing I suggested?

> Yes, I asked if you wanted counts or the whole output. You didn't
> answer :). I provided the counts.

Uh, sorry.  Counts are useless here, we need to see the sequence of
write locations to find out if there's a lot of nonconsecutive
writes happening.  BTW, the strace had better run across the whole
PG process tree --- it's quite possible that there's some interaction
between the bgwriter and the backend doing COPY, for instance.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default
Next
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: Including PL/PgSQL by default