Re: Maximum transaction rate

From: Marco Colombo <pgsql(at)esiway(dot)net>
To: jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Maximum transaction rate
Date: 2009-03-15 23:17:03
Message-ID: 49BD8C6F.1040809@esiway.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> I understand but disabling cache is not an option for anyone I know. So
> I need to know the other :)
>
> Joshua D. Drake
>

Come on, how many people/organizations do you know who really need 30+ MB/s
sustained write throughtput in the disk subsystem but can't afford a
battery backed controller at the same time?

Something must take care of writing data in the disk cache on permanent
storage; write-thru caches, battery backed controllers, write barriers
are all alternatives, choose the one you like most.

The problem here is fsync(). We know that not fsync()'ing gives you a big
performance boost, but that's not the point. I want to choose, and I want
a true fsync() when I ask for one. Because if the data don't make it to
the disk cache, the whole point about wt, bb and wb is moot.

.TM.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greenhorn 2009-03-15 23:35:02 Oracle to PostgreSQL
Previous Message Cédric Villemain 2009-03-15 22:58:01 Re: [Pkg-postgresql-public] Postgres major version support policy on Debian