From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm. |
Date: | 2017-02-27 15:07:08 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYRj_8X7_=tcDSGUJ8vGt1HA83=b5NFipJBu8aapmN4=g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Peter Eisentraut
<peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 2/26/17 11:46, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I don't see
>> a solution other than launching a separate worker for each database,
>> which seems like it could be extremely expensive if there are many
>> databases.
>
> You don't have to start all these workers at once. Starting one and not
> starting the next one until the first one is finished should be fine.
> It will have the same serial behavior that the patch is proposing anyway.
Yeah, true. The constant factor is higher, of course.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-02-27 15:07:28 | Re: PATCH: two slab-like memory allocators |
Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2017-02-27 14:59:01 | Re: [PATCH] Incremental sort (was: PoC: Partial sort) |