From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Curtis Faith" <curtis(at)galtair(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Pgsql-Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Analysis of ganged WAL writes |
Date: | 2002-10-08 15:08:08 |
Message-ID: | 2225.1034089688@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Curtis Faith" <curtis(at)galtair(dot)com> writes:
> I'm not really worried about doing page-in reads because the disks internal
> buffers should contain most of the blocks surrounding the end of the log
> file. If the successive partial writes exceed a block (which they will in
> heavy use) then most of the time this won't be a problem anyway since the
> disk will gang the full blocks before writing.
You seem to be willing to make quite a large number of assumptions about
what the disk hardware will do or not do. I trust you're going to test
your results on a wide range of hardware before claiming they have any
general validity ...
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ron Johnson | 2002-10-08 15:16:55 | Re: [GENERAL] Large databases, performance |
Previous Message | Curtis Faith | 2002-10-08 14:57:15 | Re: Analysis of ganged WAL writes |