Re: pg_rewarm status - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Janes
Subject Re: pg_rewarm status
Date
Msg-id CAMkU=1wViFurANxj7x9VwXVJiRwJqRbdyzB7GZE1YSS3c3Y=xw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_rewarm status  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

Yeah, absolutely.  The first backend that needs a prefetch probably
isn't going to get it in time.  I think that's OK though.  Once the
background process is started, response times will be quicker...
although possibly still not quick enough.  We'd need to benchmark this
to determine how quickly the background process can actually service
requests.  Does anybody have a good self-contained test case that
showcases the benefits of prefetching?

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Cédric Villemain
Date:
Subject: Re: pg_rewarm status
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze