Andres Freund wrote: > The relevant thread is at > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CA%2BTgmoaCr3kDPafK5ygYDA9mF9zhObGp_13q0XwkEWsScw6h%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com > what I didn't remember is that I voiced concern back then about exactly this: > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/201112011518.29964.andres%40anarazel.de > ;)
Interesting. If we consider for a minute that part of the cause for the slowdown is slowness in pg_clog, maybe we should reconsider the initial decision to flush as quickly as possible (i.e. adopt a strategy where walwriter sleeps a bit between two flushes) in light of the group-update feature for CLOG being proposed by Amit Kapila in another thread -- it seems that these things might go hand-in-hand. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
