Re: WIP: preloading of ispell dictionary

Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2010/3/24 Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>:
> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> 2010/3/24 Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>:
> >> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Personally I dislike idea some dictionary precompiler - it is next
> >> >> application for maintaining and maybe not necessary.
> >> >
> >> > That's the sort of thing that can be done when first required by any
> >> > backend and the results saved in a file for other backends to mmap().
> >> > It'd probably want to be opened r/w access-exclusive initially, then
> >> > re-opened read-only access-shared when ready for use.
> >> >
> >> > My only concern would be that the cache would want to be forcibly
> >> > cleared at postmaster start, so that "restart the postmaster" fixes any
> >> > messsed-up-cache issues that might arise (not that they should) without
> >> > people having to go rm'ing in the datadir. Even if Pg never has any bugs
> >> > that result in bad cache files, the file system / bad memory / cosmic
> >> > rays / etc can still mangle a cache file.
> >> >
> >> > BTW, mmap() isn't an issue on Windows:
> >> > ?http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366556%28VS.85%29.aspx
> >> > It's spelled CreateFileMapping, but otherwise is fairly similar, and is
> >> > perfect for this sort of use.
> >> >
> >> > A shared read-only mapping of processed-and-cached tsearch2 dictionaries
> >> > would save a HUGE amount of memory if many backends were using tsearch2
> >> > at the same time. I'd make a big difference here.
> >> >
> >>
> >> If you know this area well, please, enhance my first patch. I am not
> >> able to oppose to Tom, who has a clean opinion on this patch :(
> >
> > Should we add a TODO?
>
> why not ?

OK, what would the TODO text be?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do