Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock

On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 5:58 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 9:40 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 9:43 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > This and other results shared by you look promising. Will there be any
> > > improvement in workloads related to clog buffer usage?
> >
> > I did not understand this question can you explain this a bit?
> >
>
> I meant to ask about the impact of this patch on accessing transaction
> status via TransactionIdGetStatus(). Shouldn't we expect some
> improvement in accessing CLOG buffers?

Yes, there should be because 1) Now there is no common lock so
contention on a centralized control lock will be reduced when we are
accessing the transaction status from pages falling in different SLRU
banks 2) Buffers size is configurable so if the workload is accessing
transactions status of different range then it would help in frequent
buffer eviction but this might not be most common case.

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com