On 6/14/13 1:06 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
Why have a GUC here at all? Perhaps this was already discussed, and I missed it? Is it just for testing purposes, or did you intend for it to be in the final version?
You have guessed correctly! I suggested it stay in there only to make review benchmarking easier.
I started looking at this patch and it looks like we are getting a consensus that it's the right approach. Microbenchmarks appear to show a benefit, and (thanks to Noah's comment) it seems like the change is safe. Are there any remaining questions or objections?
I'm planning to duplicate Jon's test program on a few machines here, and then see if that turns into a useful latency improvement for clients. I'm trying to get this pgbench rate limit stuff working first though, because one of the tests I had in mind for WAL creation overhead would benefit from it.
-- Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US g...@2ndquadrant.com Baltimore, MD PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
