Thread: RE: AW: AW: AW: WAL does not recover gracefully from ou t-of -dis k-sp ace
RE: AW: AW: AW: WAL does not recover gracefully from ou t-of -dis k-sp ace
From
"Mikheev, Vadim"
Date:
> > FSYNC: 257tps > > O_DSYNC: 333tps > > > > Just(?) 30% faster, -:( > > First of all, if you ask me, that is one hell of an improvement :-) Of course -:) But tfsync tests were more promising -:) Probably we should update XLogWrite to write() more than 1 block, but Tom should apply his patches first (btw, did you implement "log file size" condition for checkpoints, Tom?). Vadim
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes: > Probably we should update XLogWrite to write() more than 1 block, > but Tom should apply his patches first (btw, did you implement > "log file size" condition for checkpoints, Tom?). Yes I did. There's a variable now to specify a checkpoint every N log segments --- I figured that was good enough resolution, and it allowed the test to be made only when we're rolling over to a new segment, so it's not in a time-critical path. If you're happy with what I did so far, I'll go ahead and commit. regards, tom lane