Jan Wieck wrote:>> > If the background cleaner has to not just write() but write/fsync or
>> > write/O_SYNC, it isn't going to be able to clean them fast enough. It
>> > creates a bottleneck where we didn't have one before.
>> > >> > We are trying to eliminate an I/O storm during checkpoint, but the
>> > solutions seem to be making the non-checkpoint times slower.
>> > >> >> It looks as if you're assuming that I am making the backends unable to >> write on their own, so that they have to wait on the checkpointer. I >> never said that.
> > Maybe I missed it but are those backend now doing write or write/fsync? > If the former, that is fine. If the later, it does seem slower than it
> used to be.
In my all_performance.v4.diff they do write and the checkpointer does write+sync.
Again, sorry to be confusing --- I might be good to try write/fsync from the background writer if backends can do writes on their own too without fsync. The additional fsync from the background writer should reduce disk writing during sync(). (The fsync should happen with the buffer unlocked.)
No, you're not. But thank you for suggesting what I implemented.
Jan
-- #======================================================================# # It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. # # Let's break this rule - forgive me. # #================================================== [EMAIL PROTECTED] #
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
