| From: | Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com, markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SSI patch version 14 |
| Date: | 2011-02-08 18:34:46 |
| Message-ID: | 20110208183446.GX9421@csail.mit.edu |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 10:14:44AM -0600, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> I do have some concern that if this defaults to too low a number,
> those who try SSI without bumping it and restarting the postmaster
> will not like the performance under load very much. SSI performance
> would not be affected by a low setting under light load when there
> isn't a long-running READ WRITE transaction.
If we're worried about this, we could add a log message the first time
SummarizeOldestCommittedXact is called, to suggest increasing the GUC
for number of SerializableXacts. This also has the potential benefit of
alerting the user that there's a long-running transaction, in case that's
unexpected (say, if it were caused by a wedged client)
I don't have any particular opinion on what the default value of the
GUC should be.
Dan
--
Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2011-02-08 18:40:57 | MVCC doc typo fix |
| Previous Message | Alex Hunsaker | 2011-02-08 18:31:25 | Re: arrays as pl/perl input arguments [PATCH] |