Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20821.990419562@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem ("Vadim Mikheev" <vmikheev@sectorbase.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Vadim Mikheev" <vmikheev@sectorbase.com> writes: > Unfortunately, I think that we'll need in on-disk FSM and that FSM is > actually the most complex thing to do in "space reclamation" project. I hope we can avoid on-disk FSM. Seems to me that that would create problems both for performance (lots of extra disk I/O) and reliability (what happens if FSM is corrupted? A restart won't fix it). But, if we do need it, most of the work needed to install FSM APIs should carry over. So I still don't see an objection to doing in-memory FSM as a first step. BTW, I was digging through the old Postgres papers this afternoon, to refresh my memory about what they actually said about VACUUM. I was interested to discover that at one time the tuple-insertion algorithm went as follows: 1. Pick a page at random in the relation, read it in, and see if it has enough free space. Repeat up to three times. 2. If #1 fails to find space, append tuple at end. When they got around to doing some performance measurement, they discovered that step #1 was a serious loser, and dropped it in favor of pure #2 (which is what we still have today). Food for thought. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: