Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lOlnj-00024U-98 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:30:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lOlni-0002Vp-7X for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:30:46 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lOlni-0002Vi-0s for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:30:46 +0000 Received: from momjian.us ([72.94.173.45]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lOlnf-0005Kh-SC for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 18:30:45 +0000 Received: from bruce by momjian.us with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lOlnV-0000zI-Dg; Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:30:33 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:30:33 -0400 From: Bruce Momjian To: "Bossart, Nathan" Cc: Stephen Frost , Michael Paquier , David Steele , Peter Eisentraut , Alvaro Herrera , Laurenz Albe , Bernd Helmle , "tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com" , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" , Tom Lane Subject: Re: Change default of checkpoint_completion_target Message-ID: <20210323183033.GI579@momjian.us> References: <20210113221038.GG27507@tamriel.snowman.net> <20210119191450.GO27507@tamriel.snowman.net> <519044.1611084646@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20210119194748.GP27507@tamriel.snowman.net> <20210322171059.GB20766@tamriel.snowman.net> <20210323162446.GL20766@tamriel.snowman.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 06:24:07PM +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote: > LGTM. I just have a few small wording suggestions. > > + completion overhead. Reducing this parameter is not recommended as that > + causes the I/O from the checkpoint to have to complete faster, resulting > + in a higher I/O rate, while then having a period of less I/O between the > + completion of the checkpoint and the start of the next scheduled > + checkpoint. This parameter can only be set in the > > Reducing this parameter is not recommended because it forces the > checkpoint to complete faster. This results in a higher rate of I/O > during the checkpoint followed by a period of less I/O between > checkpoint completion and the next scheduled checkpoint. FYI, I am very happy this issue is being addressed for PG 14. :-) -- Bruce Momjian https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.