Greg Smith wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:

There's something wrong with that. The number of buffer allocations shouldn't depend on the bgwriter strategy at all.

I was seeing a smaller (closer to 5%) increase in buffer allocations switching from no background writer to using the stock one before I did any code tinkering, so it didn't strike me as odd. I believe it's related to the TPS numbers. When there are more transactions being executed per unit time, it's more likely the useful blocks will stay in memory because their usage_count is getting tickled faster, and therefore there's less of the most useful blocks being swapped out only to be re-allocated again later.

Did you run the test for a constant number of transactions? If you did, the access pattern and the number of allocations should be *exactly* the same with 1 client, assuming the initial state and the seed used for the random number generator is the same.

  Heikki Linnakangas

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Reply via email to