Added to TODO:
* Be more aggressive about creating WAL files
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-10/msg01325.php
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, ITAGAK
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 10:39:12PM -0400, Greg Smith wrote:
> There's a couple of potential to-do list ideas that build on the changes
> in this area in 8.3:
I think that's the right way to go. It's too bad that this may still
happen in 8.3, but we're way past the point that this is a bug fix,
I
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ITAGAKI Takahiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I'd like to add:
> > - Remove "filling with zero" before we recycle WAL segments.
>
> Huh? We have never done that.
Oh, sorry. I misread the codes.
I would avoid PANIC if I have enough segements at start up
ITAGAKI Takahiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd like to add:
> - Remove "filling with zero" before we recycle WAL segments.
Huh? We have never done that.
regards, tom lane
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 4: Have you searche
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a couple of potential to-do list ideas that build on the changes
> in this area in 8.3:
>
> -Aggressively pre-allocate WAL segments
> -Space out checkpoint fsync requests in addition to disk writes
> -Consider re-inserting a smarter bgwriter all-
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
The 8.3 bgwriter keeps running even during checkpoints, so it's feasible
to add such a feature now.
I wonder though whether the walwriter wouldn't be a better place for it.
I do, too, but that wasn't available until too late in the 8.3 cycle to
consider a
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The 8.3 bgwriter keeps running even during checkpoints, so it's feasible
> to add such a feature now.
I wonder though whether the walwriter wouldn't be a better place for it.
regards, tom lane
---(end of br
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
Sort of a filthy hack, but what about always having an _extra_
segment around? The bgwriter could do that, no?
Now it could. The bgwriter in <=8.2 stops executing when there's a
checkpoint going on, and needing more WAL segments because a checkpoi
On Fri, Oct 26, 2007 at 08:34:49AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> we only check for the case once per checkpoint and we don't create a
> segment unless there's very little space left.
Sort of a filthy hack, but what about always having an _extra_
segment around? The bgwriter could do that, no?
A
--
On 10/26/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This ties into a loose end we didn't get to yet: being more aggressive
> about creating future WAL segments. ISTM there is no good reason for
> clients ever to have to wait for WAL segment creation --- the bgwriter,
> or possibly the walwriter, ou
Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
>> Mixed usage of buffered and direct i/o is legal, but enforces complexity
>> to kernels. If we simplify it, things would be more relaxed. For
>> example, dropping zero-filling and only use direct i/o. Is it po
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
My nearby Linux guy says mixed usage of buffered I/O and direct I/O
could cause errors (EIO) on many version of Linux kernels.
I'd be curious to get some more information about this--specifically which
versions have the problems. I'd heard about s
I encountered PANICs on CentOS 5.0 when I ran write-mostly workload.
It occurs only if wal_sync_method is set to open_sync; there were
no problem in fdatasync. It occurred on both Postgres 8.2.5 and 8.3dev.
PANIC: could not write to log file 0, segment 212 at offset 3399680,
length 73
13 matches
Mail list logo
