Re: Thoughts about NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS
От | wenhui qiu |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Thoughts about NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGjGUAL4uQAaA-Q3QJL4oR5Hf_2s2Z+Hapx0e2Cz8UL+V_s0Ww@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Thoughts about NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Thoughts about NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Japlin Li
Thank you for such important information ! Got it
Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com> 于2024年2月19日周一 10:26写道:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 at 00:56, Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On 2/18/24 03:30, Li Japin wrote:
>>
>> I find it seems need to change MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS if we enlarge the NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS,
>> I didn’t find any comments to describe the relation between MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS and
>> NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS, am I missing someghing?
>
> IMHO the relationship is pretty simple - MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS needs to be
> higher than NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS, so that the backend can acquire all
> the partition locks if needed.
>
Thanks for the explanation! Got it.
> There's other places that acquire a bunch of locks, and all of them need
> to be careful not to exceed MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS. For example gist has
> GIST_MAX_SPLIT_PAGES.
>
>
> regards
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: