Re: AIO v2.0

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Jakub Wartak <jakub(dot)wartak(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, 陈宗志 <baotiao(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: AIO v2.0
Date: 2024-12-19 22:34:29
Message-ID: 539954.1734647669@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> My current thoughts around this are that we should generally, independent of
> io_uring, increase the FD limit ourselves.

I'm seriously down on that, because it amounts to an assumption that
we own the machine and can appropriate all its resources. If ENFILE
weren't a thing, it'd be all right, but that is a thing. We have no
business trying to consume resources the DBA didn't tell us we could.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2024-12-19 22:49:48 Re: Can rs_cindex be < 0 for bitmap heap scans?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2024-12-19 22:29:12 Re: AIO v2.0