Hello, Mr. Grittner,

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
> We have 3,000 "directly connected" users, various business partner
> interfaces, and public web entry doing OLTP in 72 databases
distributed
> around the state, with real-time replication to central databases
which
> are considered derived copies.

What a big system you have.

> If all the pages modified on the central
> databases were held in buffers or cache until after peak hours,
query
> performance would suffer -- assuming it would all even fit in cache.
We
> must have a way for dirty pages to be written under load while
> responding to hundreds of thousands of queries per hour without
> disturbing "freezes" during checkpoints.

I agree with you. My words were not good. I consider it is necessary
to always advance checkpoints even under heavy load, caring OLTP
transactions.

> I raise this only to be sure that such environments are considered
with
> these changes, not to discourage improvements in the checkpoint
> techniques. We have effectively eliminated checkpoint problems in
our
> environment with a combination of battery backed controller cache
and
> aggressive background writer configuration. When you have a patch
which
> seems to help those who still have problems, I'll try to get time
> approved to run a transaction replication stream onto one of our
servers
> (in "catch up mode") while we do a web "stress test" by playing back
> requests from our production log. That should indicate how the
patch
> will affect us.

Thank you very much for your kind offer.



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly