| From: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Relation extension scalability |
| Date: | 2016-03-12 03:57:45 |
| Message-ID: | 56E393B9.1070906@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/03/16 03:46, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 5:31 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com
> <mailto:Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> FWIW, this is definitely a real possibility in any shop that has
> very high downtime costs and high transaction rates.
>
> I also think some kind of clamp is a good idea. It's not that
> uncommon to run max_connections significantly higher than 100, so
> the extension could be way larger than 16MB. In those cases this
> patch could actually make things far worse as everyone backs up
> waiting on the OS to extend many MB when all you actually needed
> were a couple dozen more pages.
>
>
> I agree, We can have some max limit on number of extra pages, What other
> thinks ?
>
Well, that's what I meant with clamping originally. I don't know what is
a good value though.
--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Chris Ruprecht | 2016-03-12 04:18:56 | Re: OS X 10.11.3, psql, bus error 10, 9.5.1 |
| Previous Message | Petr Jelinek | 2016-03-12 03:56:58 | Re: Relation extension scalability |