Re: WAL Bypass for indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Martin Scholes
Subject Re: WAL Bypass for indexes
Date
Msg-id TRQ1fnRR4VkP.pWbp5wwT@mail.iicolo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to WAL Bypass for indexes  ("Martin Scholes" <marty@iicolo.com>)
Responses Re: WAL Bypass for indexes  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: WAL Bypass for indexes  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
<div align="LEFT">I wrote:</div><div align="LEFT"> </div><div align="LEFT">> I will run multiple tests and post the
actualnumbers.<br /></div><div align="LEFT">I did run more extensive tests and did not bother writing down the numbers,
andhere's why: the unmodified Pg ran pgbench with a whopping average of 6.3% time in IO wait.</div><div
align="LEFT"> </div><divalign="LEFT">If I was able to totally eliminate that time (which is impossible), then the best
wecould hope for is a 7% increase in performance by skipping WAL of indexes.</div><div align="LEFT"> </div><div
align="LEFT">Ona related note, we currently have some indexes that are unsafe during recovery (GIST and Hash come to
mind).</div><divalign="LEFT"> </div><div align="LEFT">In the spirit of making Pg "safe at any speed," would it make
senseto put some code in the recovery section that rebuilds all indexes whose integrity cannot be assured?</div><div
align="LEFT"> </div><divalign="LEFT">M</div> 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: Summer of Code Preparation
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL Bypass for indexes