Re: Freeze avoidance of very large table.

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 03:58:19PM -0500, Jim Nasby wrote:
> >>I also think there's better ways we could handle *all* our cleanup
> >>work. Tuples have a definite lifespan, and there's potentially a lot
> >>of efficiency to be gained if we could track tuples through their
> >>stages of life... but I don't see any easy ways to do that.
> >
> >See the TODO list:
> >
> > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo
> > o Avoid the requirement of freezing pages that are infrequently
> > modified
>
> Right, but do you have a proposal for how that would actually happen?
>
> Perhaps I'm mis-understanding you, but it sounded like you were
> opposed to this patch because it doesn't do anything to avoid the
> need to freeze. My point is that no one has any good ideas on how to
> avoid freezing, and I think it's a safe bet that any ideas people do
> come up with there will be a lot more invasive than a FrozenMap is.

Didn't you think any of the TODO threads had workable solutions? And
don't expect adding an additional file per relation will be zero cost
--- added over the lifetime of 200M transactions, I question if this
approach would be a win.

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

+ Everyone has their own god. +