public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Jeff Davis <[email protected]>
To: Bharath Rupireddy <[email protected]>
To: Dilip Kumar <[email protected]>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2023 00:48:52 -0800
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALj2ACU9cfAcfVsGwUqXMace_7rfSBJ7+hXVJfVV1jnspTDGHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALj2ACXKKK=wbiG5_t6dGao5GoecMwRkhr7GjVBM_jg54+Na=Q@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CALj2ACXUbvON86vgwTkum8ab3bf1=HkMxQ5hZJZS3ZcJn8NEXQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAFiTN-uCG-+axA4r02_9OYgKJU_GkJ1=tBCxq_5UvyWmWEBywA@mail.gmail.com>
<CALj2ACU9cfAcfVsGwUqXMace_7rfSBJ7+hXVJfVV1jnspTDGHQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, 2022-12-26 at 14:20 +0530, Bharath Rupireddy wrote:
> Please review the attached v2 patch further.
I'm still unclear on the performance goals of this patch. I see that it
will reduce syscalls, which sounds good, but to what end?
Does it allow a greater number of walsenders? Lower replication
latency? Less IO bandwidth? All of the above?
--
Jeff Davis
PostgreSQL Contributor Team - AWS
view thread (4+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Improve WALRead() to suck data directly from WAL buffers when possible
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox