Re: Do we need so many hint bits?

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Do we need so many hint bits?
Date: 2012-11-16 04:37:49
Message-ID: CA+U5nM+ptW9AxDYob0p5E1PoO4CtYWsCXcNzLaw5KxL5ZOmoag@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 15 November 2012 22:21, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:

>> Removing those 3 hints would give us 3 more flag bits (eventually, after
>> we are sure they aren't just leftover), and it would also reduce the
>> chance that a page is dirtied for no other reason than to set them.
>
> We aren't pressed for flag bits particularly. I think the main
> attraction of this idea is precisely to reduce unnecessary page dirties,
> and so that leads me to suggest a variant: keep the four bits defined as
> now, but do not attempt to set XMIN_INVALID or XMAX_COMMITTED unless the
> page is already dirty. This would make it a straight-up trade of more
> clog consultation for fewer page dirties.

Hmm, I thought Alvaro wanted an extra flag bit for foreign key locks
but couldn't find it.

Come to think of it, why do we have XMIN_INVALID and XMAX_INVALID? We
never need both at the same time, so we can just use one...
XMIN_INVALID -> XACT_INVALID
XMAX_INVALID == XMIN_COMMITTED | XACT_INVALID

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Phil Sorber 2012-11-16 04:38:09 Re: [WIP] pg_ping utility
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2012-11-16 04:34:47 Re: logical changeset generation v3