From: | ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | "PGSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Bug: Buffer cache is not scan resistant |
Date: | 2007-03-13 04:40:42 |
Message-ID: | 20070313132631.6091.ITAGAKI.TAKAHIRO@oss.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > > With the default
> > > value of scan_recycle_buffers(=0), VACUUM seems to use all of buffers in pool,
> > > just like existing sequential scans. Is this intended?
> >
> New test version enclosed, where scan_recycle_buffers = 0 doesn't change
> existing VACUUM behaviour.
This is a result with scan_recycle_buffers.v3.patch. I used normal VACUUM
with background load using slowdown-ed pgbench in this instance. I believe
the patch is useful in normal cases, not only for VACUUM FREEZE.
N | time | WAL flush(*)
-----+--------+-----------
0 | 112.8s | 44.3%
1 | 148.9s | 52.1%
8 | 105.1s | 17.6%
16 | 96.9s | 8.7%
32 | 103.9s | 6.3%
64 | 89.4s | 6.6%
128 | 80.0s | 3.8%
Regards,
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sean Utt | 2007-03-13 05:05:58 | Re: My honours project - databases using dynamically attached entity-properties |
Previous Message | ITAGAKI Takahiro | 2007-03-13 04:25:22 | Re: autovacuum next steps, take 3 |