| From: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Clock with Adaptive Replacement |
| Date: | 2018-05-04 09:26:56 |
| Message-ID: | FCB1A042-574E-4B91-8ECD-794D169F3C9F@yandex-team.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> 4 мая 2018 г., в 0:37, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> написал(а):
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 3:06 PM, Vladimir Sitnikov
> <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Sample output can be seen here:
>> https://github.com/vlsi/pgsqlstat/tree/pgsqlio#pgsqlio
>
> Neat. Not sure what generated this trace, but note this part:
>
> 3271838881374 88205 0 0 1663 16385 16604 0
> 3271840973321 4368 0 0 1663 16385 16604 1
> 3271842680626 4502 0 0 1663 16385 16604 1
> 3271846077927 4173 0 0 1663 16385 16604 1
>
> If we want to avoid artificial inflation of usage counts, that kind of
> thing would be a good place to start -- obviously 4 consecutive
> accesses to the same buffer by the same backend doesn't justify a
> separate usage count bump each time.
Upper in this thread Yura suggested that usages should not create equal bump each time. He effectively suggested log scale of usages, thus many consecutive usages will be taken into account but not dramatically more important than just few recent usages.
Best regards, Andrey Borodin.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marina Polyakova | 2018-05-04 09:32:23 | Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning |
| Previous Message | Konstantin Knizhnik | 2018-05-04 09:20:53 | Re: Built-in connection pooling |