Re: [HACKERS] 16-bit page checksums for 9.2

2012-01-26 Thread Dan Scales
Some other comments on the checksum patch: I'm not sure why you moved the checksum calculation (PageSetVerificationInfo) to mdwrite() rather than smgrwrite(). If there were every another storage backend, it would have to duplicate the checksum check, right? Is there a disadvantage to putting

Re: [HACKERS] 16-bit page checksums for 9.2

2012-01-27 Thread Dan Scales
e checksum calculation (PageSetVerificationInfo) to mdextend() (or preferably smgrextend()) as well? Otherwise, you won't be checksumming a bunch of the new pages. Dan - Original Message - From: "Robert Haas" To: "Dan Scales" Cc: "Noah Misch" , "Heikki

Re: [HACKERS] double writes using "double-write buffer" approach [WIP]

2012-02-03 Thread Dan Scales
an - Original Message - From: "Robert Haas" To: "Dan Scales" Cc: "PG Hackers" Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2012 7:19:47 AM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] double writes using "double-write buffer" approach [WIP] On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Dan Scales

Re: [HACKERS] double writes using "double-write buffer" approach [WIP]

2012-02-05 Thread Dan Scales
the double-write files can be stored on. Thanks, Dan - Original Message ----- From: "Robert Haas" To: "Dan Scales" Cc: "PG Hackers" Sent: Friday, February 3, 2012 1:48:54 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] double writes using "double-write buffer" app

Re: [HACKERS] double writes using "double-write buffer" approach [WIP]

2012-02-06 Thread Dan Scales
f double writes were in use, they might be automatically switched over to full page writes for the duration of the base backup. And the double write file should not be part of the base backup. Dan - Original Message - From: "Fujii Masao" To: "Dan Scales" Cc: &qu

Re: [HACKERS] double writes using "double-write buffer" approach [WIP]

2012-02-08 Thread Dan Scales
gh. I did write the code so that any process can write a completed batch if the batch is not currently being flushed (so as to deal with crashes by backends). Having the backends flush the batches as they fill them up was just simpler for a first prototype. Dan - Original Message ----- Fro

[HACKERS] possible new option for wal_sync_method

2012-02-16 Thread Dan Scales
When running Postgres on a single ext3 filesystem on Linux, we find that the attached simple patch gives significant performance benefit (7-8% in numbers below). The patch adds a new option for wal_sync_method, which is "open_direct". With this option, the WAL is always opened with O_DIRECT (but

Re: [HACKERS] possible new option for wal_sync_method

2012-02-16 Thread Dan Scales
n. Dan - Original Message - From: "Andres Freund" To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Cc: "Dan Scales" Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 10:32:09 AM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] possible new option for wal_sync_method Hi, On Thursday, February 16, 2012 06:18:23 PM Dan Scale

Re: [HACKERS] possible new option for wal_sync_method

2012-03-02 Thread Dan Scales
block device would do the trick of flushing the disk cache. Dan - Original Message - From: "Andres Freund" To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Cc: "Dan Scales" Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 12:43:49 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] possible new option for wal_sync_method Hi,

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Double-write with Fast Checksums

2012-01-11 Thread Dan Scales
Thanks for all the comments and suggestions on the double-write patch. We are working on generating performance results for the 9.2 patch, but there is enough difference between 9.0 and 9.2 that it will take some time. One thing in 9.2 that may be causing problems with the current patch is the

Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Double-write with Fast Checksums

2012-01-17 Thread Dan Scales
py to hear all comments/suggestions. Thanks, Dan - Original Message ----- From: "Dan Scales" To: "Heikki Linnakangas" Cc: "PG Hackers" , jks...@gmail.com, "David Fetter" Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1:25:21 PM Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [WIP] Do