From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kohei Kaigai <Kohei(dot)Kaigai(at)emea(dot)nec(dot)com>, Kohei KaiGai <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, PgHacker <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [v9.1] sepgsql - userspace access vector cache |
Date: | 2011-07-21 13:03:21 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYB3D2g3hsE5bKVYF-85gXOt4CZu=mUh3qEUHMfcZXGWA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 4:00 AM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Is there a way to dump syscache statistics like there is for
> MemoryContext..Stats (something - gdb helped me there)?
I don't know of one.
> Besides that I have to admit having problems understanding why the 5MB cache
> for pg_seclabel is a problem; it's memory consumption is lineair only to the
> size of the underlying database. (in contrast with the other cache storing
> access vectors which would have O(n*m) space complexity if it wouldn't
> reclaim space). So it is proportional to the number of objects in a database
> and in size it seems to be in the same order as pg_proc, pg_class and
> pg_attribute.
Fair enough. I'm not convinced that the sheer quantity of memory use
is a problem, although I would like to see a few more test results
before we decide that definitively. I *am* unwilling to pay the
startup overhead of initializing an extra 2048 syscache that only
sepgsql users will actually need.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sushant Sinha | 2011-07-21 13:27:57 | PL/Python: No stack trace for an exception |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-07-21 12:59:45 | timing for 9.1beta4 / rc1 |