On 2017-02-01 20:30:30 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 7:28 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2016-11-28 11:40:53 -0800, Jim Nasby wrote: > >> With current limits, the most bgwriter can do (with 8k pages) is 1000 pages > >> * 100 times/sec = 780MB/s. It's not hard to exceed that with modern > >> hardware. Should we increase the limit on bgwriter_lru_maxpages? > > > > FWIW, I think working on replacing bgwriter (e.g. by working on the > > patch I send with a POC replacement) wholesale is a better approach than > > spending time increasing limits. > > I'm happy to see it replaced, but increasing the limits is about three > orders of magnitude less work than replacing it, so let's not block > this on the theory that the other thing would be better.
I seriously doubt you can meaningfully exceed 780MB/s with the current bgwriter. So it's not like the limits are all that relevant right now. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
