Re: Not HOT enough
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Not HOT enough |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMJCmMMZtQk48PTj3F1F09vaAyBc7=kHrOhQQPYLJEkyCQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Not HOT enough (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Not HOT enough
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 6:15 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> The real question is do we favour HOT cleanup on those small 8 tables, >> or do we favour HOT cleanup of every other table? > > No, the real question is why not think a little harder and see if we can > come up with a solution that doesn't involve making some cases worse to > make others better. Slightly modified patch attached. When we access a shared relation and the page is prunable we re-derive the cutoff value using GetOldestXmin. That code path is rarely taken. In particular, pg_shdepend is only accessed during object creation/alter/drop, so this isn't a path we can't spare a small amount little extra on, just like the trade-off we've taken to make locking faster for DML while making DDL a little slower. If this is still unacceptable, then I'll have to look at reducing impact on pg_shdepend from temp tables - which is still a plan. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: