Re: [HACKERS] POC: Sharing record typmods between backends
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] POC: Sharing record typmods between backends |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20170813033029.h7puphqj7nz5t5sg@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] POC: Sharing record typmods between backends (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] POC: Sharing record typmods between backends
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-08-12 22:52:57 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Well, most of the potential usecases for dsmhash I've heard about so > > far, don't actually benefit much from incremental growth. In nearly all > > the implementations I've seen incremental move ends up requiring more > > total cycles than doing it at once, and for parallelism type usecases > > the stall isn't really an issue. So yes, I think this is something > > worth considering. If we were to actually use DHT for shared caches or > > such, this'd be different, but that seems darned far off. > > I think it'd be pretty interesting to look at replacing parts of the > stats collector machinery with something DHT-based. That seems to involve a lot more than this though, given that currently the stats collector data doesn't entirely have to be in memory. I've seen sites with a lot of databases with quite some per-database stats data. Don't think we can just require that to be in memory :( - Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: