Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Robert Haas
Тема Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock
Дата
Msg-id CA+Tgmoa1iMi=mRqGP0H5-_mzzUM0CDqoZBk2oZYCUpyzj2cM2Q@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock  ("Andrey M. Borodin" <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock  (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 12:04 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> certain sense they are competing for the same job. However, they do
> aim to alleviate different TYPES of contention: the group XID update
> stuff should be most valuable when lots of processes are trying to
> update the same page, and the banks should be most valuable when there
> is simultaneous access to a bunch of different pages. So I'm not
> convinced that this patch is a reason to remove the group XID update
> mechanism, but someone might argue otherwise.

Hmm, but, on the other hand:

Currently all readers and writers are competing for the same LWLock.
But with this change, the readers will (mostly) no longer be competing
with the writers. So, in theory, that might reduce lock contention
enough to make the group update mechanism pointless.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Jelte Fennema-Nio
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Add --check option to pgindent
Следующее
От: Nathan Bossart
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: common signal handler protection