From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Clock sweep not caching enough B-Tree leaf pages? |
Date: | 2014-04-17 17:54:43 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZRjFVhK39079poS1kruVJ411rzdaosK=N2x0XHJib1Tig@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>> several orders of magnitude more often. That's clearly bad. On
>> systems that are not too heavily loaded it doesn't matter too much
>> because we just fault the page right back in from the OS pagecache.
>
> Ehhh. No. If it's a hot page that we've been holding in *our* cache
> long enough, the kernel will happily evict it as 'cold' from *its*
> cache, leading to...
>
>> But I've done pgbench runs where such decisions lead to long stalls,
>> because the page has to be brought back in from disk, and there's a
>> long I/O queue; or maybe just because the kernel thinks PostgreSQL is
>> issuing too many I/O requests and makes some of them wait to cool
>> things down.
>
> Exactly this.
Yes, I believe that's why this is so effective.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2014-04-17 18:18:20 | Re: How can we make beta testing better? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-04-17 17:33:37 | Re: WAL replay bugs |