pg.ddx.io pgsql-performance@postgresql.org mailing list archivehelp / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Cc: Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <ringerc@ringerc.id.au>
Cc: Harold A. Giménez <harold.gimenez@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 12:57:39 -0400
Message-ID: <13011.1342457859@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoYRXMWQ_DGmmqu3Zp8oW3Lt-9Lc1q3EHaV_ZmjWqaPkuA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4FFCCAC4.4030503@ringerc.id.au>
<CAAZKuFZ9tYeC1K5ZayZgztm3re_7ytbsEYFa0wwXirB6Hfm+EQ@mail.gmail.com>
<23853.1342015548@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAAZKuFYsK+ZQuC=zf0xE=M-LNa02tB7RBy3CHEUyq7LWCkK6jQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMkU=1ydaypgAeZxyaMc=KhJJw5riGMBiLpvSqOO42=qArRZmQ@mail.gmail.com>
<32078D4B40DD40ECB739D0ECD7D95996@gmail.com>
<CAMkU=1zJK6WiS9-6eO8rNmRpKSSB4=uw2mTsD=k64mNh__=Dcg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMkU=1w7vLA63hf-+Uc_j61CvOdKixsOHph9d0H-aLNBYgfX=w@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMkU=1yLXvODRZZ_=fgrEeJfk2tvZPTTD-8n8BwrAhNz_WBT0A@mail.gmail.com>
<19949.1342376967@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CA+TgmoaTf=zjP37-oG7fr1VbGfuvHSfpajgLZ65EeSJX2mmquA@mail.gmail.com>
<9603.1342454919@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CA+Tgmoa4ta60Y-rZpEPDRCQKJV8-Uqe0P610Jgj2q7e+fondig@mail.gmail.com>
<11952.1342456591@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CA+TgmoYRXMWQ_DGmmqu3Zp8oW3Lt-9Lc1q3EHaV_ZmjWqaPkuA@mail.gmail.com>
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> In my view, the elephant in the room here is that it's dramatically
> inefficient for every backend to send an fsync request on every block
> write.
Yeah. This was better before the decision was taken to separate
bgwriter from checkpointer; before that, only local communication was
involved for the bulk of write operations (or at least so we hope).
I remain less than convinced that that split was really a great idea.
regards, tom lane
view thread (46+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <13011.1342457859@sss.pgh.pa.us> Permalink: ../13011.1342457859@sss.pgh.pa.us/ Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/13011.1342457859@sss.pgh.pa.us ·
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: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, jeff.janes@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, daniel@heroku.com, ringerc@ringerc.id.au, harold.gimenez@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PERFORM] DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation In-Reply-To: <13011.1342457859@sss.pgh.pa.us> * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox