From: Mladen Gogala <mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1?
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 19:05:05 -0500
Message-ID: <4CE31C31.6090108@vmsinfo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CE312D9.6030503@agliodbs.com>
References: <AANLkTi=n3zxiLNFhbpiN=JPQPwB=BhXf9iepw1KOEs8U@mail.gmail.com>
<4CCDCAA3.4050805@2ndquadrant.com>
<201011010010.28724.andres@anarazel.de>
<4CD472CC.80006@2ndquadrant.com>
<AANLkTinEAmKDz7x356bgX=-6x7zpjK3bB0hYAmKvYHB9@mail.gmail.com>
<4CE2EBF8.4040602@2ndquadrant.com>
<4CE312D9.6030503@agliodbs.com>
Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 11/16/10 12:39 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
>
>> I want to next go through and replicate some of the actual database
>> level tests before giving a full opinion on whether this data proves
>> it's worth changing the wal_sync_method detection. So far I'm torn
>> between whether that's the right approach, or if we should just increase
>> the default value for wal_buffers to something more reasonable.
>>
>
> We'd love to, but wal_buffers uses sysV shmem.
>
>
Speaking of the SYSV SHMEM, is it possible to use huge pages?
--
Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
http://www.vmsinfo.com
The Leader in Integrated Media Intelligence Solutions
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: mladen.gogala@vmsinfo.com, josh@agliodbs.com
Subject: Re: Defaulting wal_sync_method to fdatasync on Linux for 9.1?
In-Reply-To: <4CE31C31.6090108@vmsinfo.com>
* 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