Re: BufFreelistLock
От
Alvaro Herrera
Тема
Re: BufFreelistLock
Дата
Msg-id
1291988678-sup-5714@alvh.no-ip.org
Ответ на
Re: BufFreelistLock (Jim Nasby)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
BufFreelistLock Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: BufFreelistLock Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
Re: BufFreelistLock Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: BufFreelistLock Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Re: BufFreelistLock Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Re: BufFreelistLock Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net>
Excerpts from Jim Nasby's message of jue dic 09 16:54:24 -0300 2010: > Ideally, the clock sweep would be run by bgwriter and not individual backends. In that case it shouldn't matter much what the performance of the sweep is. To do that I think we'd want the bgwriter to target there being X number of buffers on the free list instead of (or in addition to) targeting how many dirty buffers need to be written. This would mirror what operating systems do; they strive to keep X number of pages on the free list so that when a process needs memory it can get it quickly. Isn't it what it does if you set bgwriter_lru_maxpages to some very large value? -- Álvaro Herrera The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc. PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления