| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michail Nikolaev <michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me> |
| Subject: | Re: Why doesn't GiST VACUUM require a super-exclusive lock, like nbtree VACUUM? |
| Date: | 2025-02-28 01:53:19 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-Wznyb4m1h40DycQqaDe3a3z=YkdsGGGfcX+YjC8J64d7=A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Feb 8, 2025 at 8:47 AM Michail Nikolaev
<michail(dot)nikolaev(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Just some commit messages + few cleanups.
I'm worried about this:
+These longer pin lifetimes can cause buffer exhaustion with messages like "no
+unpinned buffers available" when the index has many pages that have similar
+ordering; but future work can figure out how to best work that out.
I think that we should have some kind of upper bound on the number of
pins that can be acquired at any one time, in order to completely
avoid these problems. Solving that problem will probably require GiST
expertise that I don't have right now.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2025-02-28 02:13:46 | Re: Confine vacuum skip logic to lazy_scan_skip |
| Previous Message | Andy Alsup | 2025-02-28 01:50:16 | Re: Update docs for UUID data type |