From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Cc: | Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make large sequential scans and VACUUMs work in a limited-size |
Date: | 2007-05-31 09:11:30 |
Message-ID: | 465E9142.1050101@enterprisedb.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Log Message:
>> -----------
>> Make large sequential scans and VACUUMs work in a limited-size "ring" of
>> buffers, rather than blowing out the whole shared-buffer arena. Aside from
>> avoiding cache spoliation, this fixes the problem that VACUUM formerly tended
>> to cause a WAL flush for every page it modified, because we had it hacked to
>> use only a single buffer. Those flushes will now occur only once per
>> ring-ful. The exact ring size, and the threshold for seqscans to switch into
>> the ring usage pattern, remain under debate; but the infrastructure seems
>> done. The key bit of infrastructure is a new optional BufferAccessStrategy
>> object that can be passed to ReadBuffer operations; this replaces the former
>> StrategyHintVacuum API.
>
> I think now is time to re-test the patch for advancing OldestXmin during
> vacuum?
Thanks for the reminder, I'll schedule those tests.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Teodor Sigaev | 2007-05-31 13:42:04 | Re: pgsql: Make large sequential scans and VACUUMs work in a limited-size |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-05-31 07:43:09 | Re: pgsql: Fix overly-strict sanity check in BeginInternalSubTransaction |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Galy Lee | 2007-05-31 09:14:06 | BUG #3326: Invalid lower bound of autovacuum_cost_limit |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-05-31 09:01:14 | Re: TOAST usage setting |