Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob81D2Z0z5gZRC3uYJ7Eo1a-3oaiO0oK3Tu2Ki+MWxsMg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off
Re: WalSndWakeup() and synchronous_commit=off
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com> wrote:
> Calling WalSndWakeup() while WALWriteLock is being held might cause another
> performance degradation. No?

That definitely doesn't seem ideal - a lot of things can pile up
behind WALWriteLock.  I'm not sure how big a problem it would be in
practice, but we generally make a practice of avoiding sending signals
while holding LWLocks whenever possible...

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: PL/perl elog(ERROR) Does not Abort Transaction
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Ensure age() returns a stable value rather than the latest value