On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 11:05 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
> I renamed the CVs because the names I had used before broke the
> convention that variables named ckpt_* are protected by ckpt_lck, and
> pushed.
Erm... this made successful checkpoints slightly faster but failed
checkpoints infinitely slower
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 1:15 AM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 7:12 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Having useful infrastructure is sure cool.
>
> Yay!
+1
I renamed the CVs because the names I had used before broke the
convention that variables named ckpt_* are protected by ckpt_lck,
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 7:12 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Having useful infrastructure is sure cool.
Yay!
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Hi,
On 2019-03-13 11:56:19 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> A user complained about CREATE DATABASE taking > 200ms even with fsync
> set to off. Andres pointed out that that'd be the clunky poll/sleep
> loops in checkpointer.c.
>
> Here's a draft patch to use condition variables instead.
>
> Unpatc
Hello hackers,
A user complained about CREATE DATABASE taking > 200ms even with fsync
set to off. Andres pointed out that that'd be the clunky poll/sleep
loops in checkpointer.c.
Here's a draft patch to use condition variables instead.
Unpatched:
postgres=# checkpoint;
CHECKPOINT
Time: 101.848
