Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMKV8sVoX=Qp+-B4fsjTx5RBE2BgPwmviALfSE5Pm4v1UQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer  (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>)
Re: Separating bgwriter and checkpointer  ("Dickson S. Guedes" <listas@guedesoft.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:10 AM, Dickson S. Guedes <listas@guedesoft.net> wrote:
>
>> Ah ok! I started reviewing the v4 patch version, this is my comments:
>
> ...
>
>> Well, all the tests was running with the default postgresql.conf in my
>> laptop but I'll setup a more "real world" environment to test for
>> performance regression. Until now I couldn't notice any significant
>> difference in TPS before and after patch in a small environment. I'll
>> post something soon.
>
> Great testing, thanks. Likely will have no effect in non-I/O swamped
> environment, but no regression expected either.


Any reason or objection to committing this patch?


--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: new compiler warnings
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: synchronized snapshots