From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Background LRU Writer/free list |
Date: | 2008-03-11 15:44:00 |
Message-ID: | 200803111544.m2BFi0D06645@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Added to TODO:
* Consider adding buffers the BGW finds reusable to the free list
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00781.php
* Automatically tune bgwriter_delay based on activity rather then using a
fixed interval
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2007-04/msg00781.php
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Smith wrote:
> I'm mostly done with my review of the "Automatic adjustment of
> bgwriter_lru_maxpages" patch. In addition to issues already brought up
> with that code, there are some small things that need to be done to merge
> it with the recent pg_stat_bgwriter patch, and I have some concerns about
> its unbounded scanning of the buffer pool; I'll write that up in more
> detail or just submit an improved patch as I get time this week.
>
> But there's a fundamental question that has been bugging me, and I think
> it impacts the direction that code should take. Unless I'm missing
> something in my reading, buffers written out by the LRU writer aren't ever
> put onto the free list. I assume this is to stop from prematurely
> removing buffers that contain useful data. In cases where a substantial
> percentage of the buffer cache is dirty, the LRU writer has to scan a
> significant portion of the pool looking for one of the rare clean buffers,
> then write it out. When a client goes to grab a free buffer afterward, it
> has to scan the same section of the pool to find the now clean buffer,
> which seems redundant.
>
> With the new patch, the LRU writer is fairly well bounded in that it
> doesn't write out more than it thinks it will need; you shouldn't get into
> a situation where many more pages are written than will be used in the
> near future. Given that mindset, shouldn't pages the LRU scan writes just
> get moved onto the free list?
>
> --
> * Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://postgres.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-03-11 15:46:43 | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-03-11 15:40:05 | Re: Autovacuum vs statement_timeout |