Re: heap vacuum & cleanup locks
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: heap vacuum & cleanup locks |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMLfU5PkkRbf5ZQB1aZMC8iyM2sCU7x-pAEALi6QyDoPpA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: heap vacuum & cleanup locks (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: heap vacuum & cleanup locks
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: >> heapgetpage() gets a page and a pin, but holds the pin until it reads >> the next page. Wow! > >> That is both annoying and very dumb. It should hold the pin long >> enough to copy the data and then release the pin. > > I don't find that anywhere near as obvious as you seem to. I think you > are trying to optimize for the wrong set of conditions. ISTM we should optimise to access the cachelines in the buffer once. Holding a pin and re-accessing the buffer via main memory seems pretty bad plan to me. Which conditions are being optimised by doing that? > I will also note that the behavior of holding pin for as long as we are > stopped on a particular tuple is not specific to seqscans. Agreed. Bad things may happen in more than one place. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: