| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Lowering the ever-growing heap->pd_lower |
| Date: | 2022-04-07 23:01:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20220407230101.w46kadkfkglvfn3p@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-04-04 19:24:22 -0700, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> We should definitely increase MaxHeapTuplesPerPage before too long,
> for a variety of reasons that I have talked about in the past. Its
> current value is 291 on all mainstream platforms, a value that's
> derived from accidental historic details -- which predate HOT.
I'm on-board with that - but I think we should rewrite a bunch of places that
use MaxHeapTuplesPerPage sized-arrays on the stack first. It's not great using
several KB of stack at the current the current value already (*), but if it grows
further...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
* lazy_scan_prune() has
OffsetNumber deadoffsets[MaxHeapTuplesPerPage];
xl_heap_freeze_tuple frozen[MaxHeapTuplesPerPage];
which already works out to 4074 bytes.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-04-07 23:03:41 | Re: Lowering the ever-growing heap->pd_lower |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2022-04-07 22:43:05 | Re: Lowering the ever-growing heap->pd_lower |