Hi, On 2016-10-06 20:52:22 -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > This contention on WAL reminds me of another scenario I've heard about that > was similar. > > To fix things what happened was that anyone that the first person to block > would be responsible for writing out all buffers for anyone blocked behind > "him".
We pretty much do that already. But while that's happening, the other would-be-writers show up as blocking on the lock. We don't use kind of an odd locking model for the waiters (LWLockAcquireOrWait()), which waits for the lock to be released, but doesn't try to acquire it afterwards. Instead the wal position is rechecked, and in many cases we'll be done afterwards, because enough has been written out. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
