Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, tndrwang(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Subject: Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock
Date: 2024-03-03 13:58:39
Message-ID: 202403031358.b435eh7u72td@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2024-Feb-29, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

> On 2024-Feb-29, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:

> > Some of them, commit_timestamp_buffers, transaction_buffers,
> > subtransaction_buffers use 0 to mean auto-tuning based on
> > shared-buffer size. I think it's worth adding an extra_desc such as "0
> > to automatically determine this value based on the shared buffer
> > size".
>
> How about this?

Pushed that way, but we can discuss further wording improvements/changes
if someone wants to propose any.

--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"La rebeldía es la virtud original del hombre" (Arthur Schopenhauer)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jelte Fennema-Nio 2024-03-03 14:27:35 Re: Make query cancellation keys longer
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2024-03-03 11:50:38 Re: Table AM Interface Enhancements