Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
| От | Robert Haas |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+TgmoYNS3SNjk5DuFZw4E2POSpk+FjmtVqDu9-tOttS1FPgyw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 6:56 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hmm, that test case isn't all that synthetic. It's just a single >> column bulk update, which isn't anything all that crazy, and 5-10% >> isn't nothing. >> >> I'm kinda surprised it made that much difference, though. >> > > I think it is because heap_getattr() is not that cheap. We have > noticed the similar problem during development of scan key push down > work [1]. Yeah. So what's the deal with this? Is somebody working on figuring out a different approach that would reduce this overhead? Are we going to defer WARM to v11? Or is the intent to just ignore the 5-10% slowdown on a single column update and commit everything anyway? (A strong -1 on that course of action from me.) -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: