Hi, On 2022-06-13 19:08:35 +0530, Nitin Jadhav wrote: > > Have you measured the performance effects of this? On fast storage with > > large > > shared_buffers I've seen these loops in profiles. It's probably fine, but > > it'd > > be good to verify that. > > To understand the performance effects of the above, I have taken the > average of five checkpoints with the patch and without the patch in my > environment. Here are the results. > With patch: 269.65 s > Without patch: 269.60 s
Those look like timed checkpoints - if the checkpoints are sleeping a part of the time, you're not going to see any potential overhead. To see whether this has an effect you'd have to make sure there's a certain number of dirty buffers (e.g. by doing CREATE TABLE AS some_query) and then do a manual checkpoint and time how long that times. Greetings, Andres Freund
