From: Luke Lonergan <llonergan@greenplum.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andrew McMillan <andrew@catalyst.net.nz>
Cc: Matthew Schumacher <matt.s@aptalaska.net>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Performance problems testing with Spamassassin
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:13:41 -0700
Message-ID: <BF0FB1D5.A3F5%llonergan@greenplum.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16614.1122646366@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Tom,
On 7/29/05 7:12 AM, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "Luke Lonergan" <LLonergan@greenplum.com> writes:
>> I guess we see the real culprit here. Anyone surprised it's the WAL?
>
> You have not proved that at all.
As Alvaro pointed out, fsync has impact on more than WAL, so good point.
Interesting that fsync has such a huge impact on this situation though.
- Luke
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: llonergan@greenplum.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, andrew@catalyst.net.nz, matt.s@aptalaska.net
Subject: Re: Performance problems testing with Spamassassin
In-Reply-To: <BF0FB1D5.A3F5%llonergan@greenplum.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