On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 9:47 AM, Aidan Van Dyk <ai...@highrise.ca> wrote: > It does this by moving the FPW/IO penalty from the commit time of a > backend dirtying the buffer first, to the eviction time of a backend > evicting a dirty buffer. And if you're lucky enough that the > background writer is the only one writing dirty buffers, you'll see > lots of improvements in your performance (equivilent of running with > current FPW off). But I have a feeling that many of us see backends > having to write dirty buffers often enough too that the reduction in > commit/WAL latency will be offset (hopefully not as much) by increased > query processing time as backends double-write dirty buffers.
I have that feeling, too. Someone needs to devote some time to performance testing this stuff. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
