Re: Eager page freeze criteria clarification

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Eager page freeze criteria clarification
Date: 2023-12-21 21:07:57
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZ4W6wu5SWCOnrU92YyPs_rhkcjsjzV=wEdUWOPFtNbhg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:56 AM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Agreed. I plan to test with another distribution. Though, the exercise
> of determining which ones are useful is probably more challenging.
> I imagine we will have to choose one distribution (as opposed to
> supporting different distributions and choosing based on data access
> patterns for a table). Though, even with a normal distribution, I
> think it should be an improvement.

Our current algorithm isn't adaptive at all, so I like our chances of
coming out ahead. It won't surprise me if somebody finds a case where
there is a regression, but if we handle some common and important
cases correctly (e.g. append-only, update-everything-nonstop) then I
think we're probably ahead even if there are some cases where we do
worse. It does depend on how much worse they are, and how realistic
they are, but we don't want to be too fearful here: we know what we're
doing right now isn't too great.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Melanie Plageman 2023-12-21 21:36:12 Re: Emit fewer vacuum records by reaping removable tuples during pruning
Previous Message Melanie Plageman 2023-12-21 20:58:17 Re: Eager page freeze criteria clarification