Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins
От | Pavan Deolasee |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CABOikdP2=0MXzy-jTo0s2tzZ_UKRhN7m1J=dtZQY=6T-wMNGng@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized
PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
I've tried to reproduce problems around this (when I wrote this), but
it's really hard to construct cases that need more than 8 pins. I've
tested performance for those cases by simply not using the array, and
while the performance suffers a bit, it's not that bad.
An orthogonal issue I noted is that we never check for overflow in the ref count itself. While I understand overflowing int32 counter will take a large number of pins on the same buffer, it can still happen in the worst case, no ? Or is there a theoretical limit on the number of pins on the same buffer by a single backend ?
--
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee
Thanks,
Pavan
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: