| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Removing special case OID generation |
| Date: | 2012-02-13 14:41:08 |
| Message-ID: | 201202131541.09564.andres@anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Monday, February 13, 2012 02:08:08 PM Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > Yeh, I was thinking we would do well to implement cached sequences for
> > say first 1000 sequences.
>
> Another option might be to store all the sequences for a particular
> database in a single underlying data file. The current implementation
> uses a whole page for a single tuple that is presumably much smaller
> than that. So when you create a sequence "foo", it's really creating
> a row in some new system catalog pg_sequences, or something like that.
I wonder if the tigher packing would be noticeable contentionwise.... If
several hot sequences end up in a single page that could end up being
measurable.
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-02-13 15:12:34 | Re: When do we lose column names? |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-02-13 14:29:56 | Re: RFC: Making TRUNCATE more "MVCC-safe" |