Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem
От | Ivan Kartyshov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 479c08ff-4d11-1e2e-625b-eb72e686b11a@postgrespro.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/02/2016 06:01 AM, Robert Haas wrote: > I wonder whether we ought to just switch from the consistent method to > the semiconsistent method and call it good. I agree with you that > taking every buffer partition lock simultaneously seems like too much > locking. And in the future if we replace the buffer mapping hash with > something that is lock-free or close to it, then we wouldn't even have > buffer partition locks any more, and probably no way at all to get an > entirely consistent snapshot. > What do you think of this? I fully agree with you that it would be preferred in the future to replace the buffer mapping hash with some of lock-free algorithms. In the question of replacing the consistent method I agree with you, Andres Freund and Peter Geoghegan: the consistent method does not bring any considerable benefits. You might be right regarding the three different modes, but our DBAs asked if we could preserve a legacy mode too, thus the choice. On 09/02/2016 06:19 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > +1. I think, before long, we're going to have to switch away from having >locks & partitions in the first place. So I don't see a problem relaxing > this. It's not like that consistency really buysyou anything... I'd > even consider not using any locks. If we will replace consistent method, then we should replace it with the partially consistent method (called "nonconsistent") because: 1) it's based on fast spinlocks (it's not fully up to its name, though) 2) it's *almost* the fastest one (the less time needed for execution of method, the less data core will change and as a consequence the more consistent snapshot will be) 3) and it has less influence on the entire system during query processing. On 09/02/2016 06:30 AM, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > I would like to be able to run pg_buffercache in production from time >to time. Yes, in our experience the usage of fully consistent pg_buffercache in production is quite a courageous decision. --- Ivan Kartyshov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: