From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info>, Gregory Smith <gregsmithpgsql(at)gmail(dot)com>, John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
Subject: | Re: The Free Space Map: Problems and Opportunities |
Date: | 2021-08-20 16:03:36 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoa2EmgeMJGAkQHobA_zCZ29Z4=oW5aSKonYJ9FYkrAejw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 11:48 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 7:45 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I very much doubt that you can get away without some sort of free
> > space map. Even if in most cases most pages are closed to insertions,
> > there will be important corner cases where lots of pages are open for
> > insertions, like when you just deleted a ton of rows and then ran
> > VACUUM. And we cannot lose track of even one of those open pages or,
> > if the pre-8.4 state of the world is any indication, we will be super
> > sad.
>
> I agree with all that. The point I was making is that this new FSM
> design will have an on-disk size that is "a function of the workload".
That could be the right decision, but nothing said up to this point
really seems to suggest it. The open/closed distinction and the
changes in how to bin available space could all be done with the
present model.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jesper Pedersen | 2021-08-20 16:13:16 | Re: Middleware Messages for FE/BE |
Previous Message | Jelte Fennema | 2021-08-20 16:01:06 | Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: Allow declaration after statement and reformat code to use it |