Re: effective_io_concurrency in 9.6beta

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
Subject: Re: effective_io_concurrency in 9.6beta
Date: 2016-05-24 18:28:10
Message-ID: 7307.1464114490@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> commit 1aba62ec made zero be an illegal value for effective_io_concurrency.
> i think this was an accident. If not, then the sample postgresql.conf
> (at least) needs to be updated.

It looks like the problem is that the new range check

+ /* This range check shouldn't fail, but let's be paranoid */
+ return (new_prefetch_pages > 0.0 && new_prefetch_pages < (double) INT_MAX);

should be testing for >= 0.0 not > 0.0.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-05-24 18:34:38 Re: effective_io_concurrency in 9.6beta
Previous Message Tom Lane 2016-05-24 18:16:40 Re: Allow COPY to use parameters