| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Full page images in WAL & Cache Invalidation |
| Date: | 2007-07-22 20:31:39 |
| Message-ID: | 4066.1185136299@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Florian G. Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> writes:
> My basic assumption is that DDL is something quite uncommon on a
> production system.
I'm not sure I believe that, because of temp tables. There's also
the problem that plain VACUUM (or ANALYZE) causes a relcache flush
to update the relation-size statistics.
The real problem with the scheme you propose is that it turns a
cache flush on one table into a system-wide cache flush.
We might be able to do something about the temp-table case upstream:
AFAICS there's no reason for backends to broadcast cache flushes for
their own temp tables to other backends. But that's just a sketch
of a thought at the moment.
Anyway, if you believe that DDL is infrequent, why are you resistant
to the idea of WAL-logging cache flushes?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2007-07-22 20:37:52 | Re: 8.2 is 30% better in pgbench than 8.3 |
| Previous Message | Florian G. Pflug | 2007-07-22 20:09:09 | Re: Full page images in WAL & Cache Invalidation |