Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock
От | Dilip Kumar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFiTN-vxiY6yfgtn65+GNThCHEVk=TPr7=F2KS27VNZ77dLz5g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 3:44 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > On 2024-Feb-01, Dilip Kumar wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 3:19 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote: > > > > > > postgres -c lc_messages=C -c shared_buffers=$((512*17)) > > > > > > 2024-02-01 10:48:13.548 CET [1535379] FATAL: invalid value for parameter "transaction_buffers": 17 > > > 2024-02-01 10:48:13.548 CET [1535379] DETAIL: "transaction_buffers" must be a multiple of 16 > > > > Maybe we should resize it to the next multiple of the SLRU_BANK_SIZE > > instead of giving an error? > > Since this is the auto-tuning feature, I think it should use the > previous multiple rather than the next, but yeah, something like that. Okay. > > While I have your attention -- if you could give a look to the 0001 > patch I posted, I would appreciate it. > I will look into it. Thanks. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: