Re: init_sequence spill to hash table
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: init_sequence spill to hash table |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20131114144938.GB7522@alap2.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: init_sequence spill to hash table (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-11-14 09:47:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > On 2013-11-14 09:23:20 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> We most certainly *do* discard entries, if they're not open when a cache > >> flush event comes along. > > > What I was aiming at is that we don't discard them because of a limited > > cache size. I don't think it means much that we flush the entry when > > it's changed but not referenced. > > Well, I don't want non-user-significant events (such as an sinval queue > overrun) causing sequence state to get discarded. We would get bug > reports about lost sequence values. But we can easily do as you suggest and simply retain the entry in that case. I am just not seeing the memory overhead argument as counting much since we don't protect against it in normal operation. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: