Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMLB8z7R2bZrGN5ROCNkUFr63u26=4+7rn9LbAiuiDZn4Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay
Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 25 March 2013 14:26, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> wrote: > This is pretty similar to the proposal Atri and I just recently made. > I am 100% in agreement that something must be done here...SELECT has > none of the i/o mitigation features that vacuum has. Is your idea > better? probably (although you have to give a small penalty for a user > facing tunable) I was hoping this was a new idea entirely, since I was focusing on simply limiting foreground work rather than trying to work out how to optimise foreground work or work out how to make background tasks work better. > but we need testing against real world workloads, or > at least a much better synthetic one than pgbench, which per recent > discussions is probably the top objective of the project (a > performance farm, etc.). Self-tuning the background workloads needs lots of testing. Limiting foreground work needs very little, or none. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: