Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 2014-10-02 10:40:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> >> OK.
>> >
>> > Given that the results look good, do you plan to push this?
>>
>> By "this", you mean the increase in the number of buffer mapping
>> partitions to 128, and a corresponding increase in MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS?
>
> Yes. Now that I think about it I wonder if we shouldn't define MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS like
> #define MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS       (NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS + 64)
> or something like that?

Nah.  That assumes NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS will always be the biggest
thing, and I don't see any reason to assume that, even if we're making
it true for now.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company