And I see now that he's doing a stream of read-only queries on a slave,
presumably with no WAL even being replayed...

Sorry for the noise....


* Aidan Van Dyk <> [100412 09:40]:
> * Robert Haas <> [100412 07:10]:
> > I think we need to investigate this more.  It's not going to look good
> > for the project if people find that a hot standby server runs two
> > orders of magnitude slower than the primary.
> Yes, it's not "good", but it's a known problem.  We've had people
> complaining that wal-replay can't keep up with a wal stream from a heavy
> server.
> The master producing the wal stream has $XXX seperate read/modify
> processes working over the data dir, and is bottle-necked by the
> serialized WAL stream.  All the seek+read delays are parallized and
> overlapping.
> But on the slave (traditionally PITR slave, now also HS/SR), has al
> lthat read-modify-write happening in a single thread fasion, meaning
> that WAL record $X+1 waits until the buffer $X needs to modify is read
> in.  All the seek+read delays are serialized.
> You can optimize that by keepdng more of them in buffers (shared, or OS
> cache), but the WAL producer, by it's very nature being a
> multi-task-io-load producing random read/write is always going to go
> quicker than single-stream random-io WAL consumer...
> a.
> -- 
> Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,
>                                       command like a king,
>                                   work like a slave.

Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,                                       command like a king,                                   work like a slave.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to