Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > I would be very surprised if we can find a system where gettimeofday() > takes a significant amount of time compared with fsync(). It might be > (probably is) too expensive to stick into code paths that are heavily > CPU-bounded, but surely the cost here is going to be dwarfed by the > fsync(), no? Unless maybe there's no I/O to be done anyway, but that > case doesn't seem important to optimize for.
I'm not sure I buy that --- the whole point of spread checkpoints is that we hope the I/O happens before we actually call fsync. > Making it > conditional on log_checkpoints seems entirely sufficient to me. But I'll agree with that. If you're turning on log_checkpoints then you've given the system permission to indulge in extra overhead for monitoring. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers