On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 01:53, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > This patch splits bgwriter into 2 processes: checkpointer and > bgwriter, seeking to avoid contentious changes. Additional changes are > expected in this release to build upon these changes for both new > processes, though this patch stands on its own as both a performance > vehicle and in some ways a refcatoring to simplify the code.
While you're already splitting up bgwriter, could there be any benefit to spawning a separate bgwriter process for each tablespace? If your database has one tablespace on a fast I/O system and another on a slow one, the slow tablespace would also bog down background writing for the fast tablespace. But I don't know whether that's really a problem or not. Regards, Marti -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
