From: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Maximize page freezing |
Date: | 2022-07-29 20:49:38 |
Message-ID: | CAEze2WhD5zhs5RamxUSj+KTuZ2twv7h93d=gMkHNhYRLNTJXLg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 29 Jul 2022 at 16:38, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2022 at 14:55, Matthias van de Meent
> <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Great idea, yet this patch seems to only freeze those tuples that are
> > located after the first to-be-frozen tuple. It should probably
> > re-visit earlier live tuples to potentially freeze those as well.
>
> Like this?
That wasn't quite what I imagined. In your patch, heap_page_prune is
disabled after the first frozen tuple, which makes the retry mechanism
with the HTSV check loop forever because it expects that tuple to be
vacuumed.
I was thinking more in the line of "do a backtrack in a specialized
code block when entering max_freeze_page mode" (without using
'retry'), though I'm not sure whether that's the best option
available.
Kind regards,
Matthias van de Meent
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jacob Champion | 2022-07-29 21:02:03 | Re: [Commitfest 2022-07] Begins Now |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2022-07-29 20:29:28 | Re: making relfilenodes 56 bits |