Search Postgresql Archives

Re: shared_buffers smaller than max_wal_size

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thanks again - for some reason I thought that each page should be fsynced separately...

I am running ZFS and going to try following config on 32gb server:

shared_buffers = 512mb (previously was 6gb)
max_wal_size = 8gb
zfs_arc_max = 24gb

i.e. run with minimal shared buffers and do all the caching in ZFS. As I understand it now such config can provide better results since data will be cached once in ZFS.

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 8:59 PM, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 09/24/2017 11:03 AM, Vladimir Mihailenco wrote:
> Thanks for your response. Ss I understand it now the difference is
> that checkpoints are synchronous but dirty pages eviction from shared
> buffers are asynchronous, correct? How then Postgres ensures that OS
> writes data to the disk so WAL can be deleted?
>

The last step in a checkpoin is fsync() on the files. Without that, the
checkpoint is considered incomplete and the database won't rely on it.


regards

--
Tomas Vondra                  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Postgresql Jobs]     [Postgresql Admin]     [Postgresql Performance]     [Linux Clusters]     [PHP Home]     [PHP on Windows]     [Kernel Newbies]     [PHP Classes]     [PHP Books]     [PHP Databases]     [Postgresql & PHP]     [Yosemite]

  Powered by Linux