On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Tomas Vondra
<tomas.von...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Another point (which Jan Wieck made me think of) is that the optimal
>> behavior here likely depends on whether xlog and data are on the same
>> disk controller. If they aren't, the FPW spike and background writes
>> may not interact as much.
> I'm not sure what exactly you mean by "optimal behavior" here. Surely if you
> want to minimize interference between WAL and regular I/O, you'll do that.
> But I don't see what that has to do with the writes generated by the
> checkpoint? If we do much more writes at the beginning of the checkpoint
> (due to getting confused by FPW), and OS starts flushing that to disk
> because we exceed dirty_(background)_bytes, that surely interferes with
> reads (which is a major issue for queries).

Well, it's true that the checkpointer dirty page writes could
interfere with reads, but if you've also got lots of FPW-bloated WAL
records being written to the same disk at the same time, I would think
that'd be worse.  No?

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to