On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > In January of 2011 Robert committed 7f242d880b5b5d9642675517466d31373961cf98 > to try and compact the fsync queue when clients find it full. There's no > visible behavior change, just a substantial performance boost possible in > the rare but extremely bad situations where the background writer stops > doing fsync absorption. I've been running that in production at multiple > locations since practically the day it hit this mailing list, with backports > all the way to 8.3 being common (and straightforward to construct). I've > never seen a hint of a problem with this new code.
I've been in favor of back-porting this for a while, so you'll get no argument from me. Anyone disagree? -- 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
