From: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Maximize page freezing |
Date: | 2022-07-28 13:35:36 |
Message-ID: | CANbhV-GLva4jC2v-Gd68AzDOYJgE6a1BjV=6z+fOZPRdYgyphg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Starting new thread with updated patch to avoid confusion, as
mentioned by David Steele on the original thread:
Original messageid: 20201118020418(dot)GA13408(at)alvherre(dot)pgsql
On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 at 02:04, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> wrote:
> On 2020-Nov-17, Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > As an additional optimization, if we do find a row that needs freezing
> > on a data block, we should simply freeze *all* row versions on the
> > page, not just the ones below the selected cutoff. This is justified
> > since writing the block is the biggest cost and it doesn't make much
> > sense to leave a few rows unfrozen on a block that we are dirtying.
>
> Yeah. We've had earlier proposals to use high and low watermarks: if any
> tuple is past the high watermark, then freeze all tuples that are past
> the low watermark. However this is ancient thinking (prior to
> HEAP_XMIN_FROZEN) and we don't need the low watermark to be different
> from zero, since the original xid is retained anyway.
>
> So +1 for this idea.
Updated patch attached.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
one_freeze_then_max_freeze.v9.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.9 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2022-07-28 13:45:30 | Re: small windows psqlrc re-wording |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2022-07-28 13:32:09 | Re: Perform streaming logical transactions by background workers and parallel apply |