Re: Reducing the size of BufferTag & remodeling forks
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Reducing the size of BufferTag & remodeling forks |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 14196.1435845119@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Reducing the size of BufferTag & remodeling forks (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Reducing the size of BufferTag & remodeling forks
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> 1) Introduce a shared pg_relfilenode table. Every table, even
> shared/nailed ones, get an entry therein. It's there to make it
> possibly to uniquely allocate relfilenodes across databases &
> tablespaces.
> 2) Replace relation forks, with the exception of the init fork which is
> special anyway, with separate relfilenodes. Stored in seperate
> columns in pg_class.
> Thoughts?
I'm concerned about the traffic and contention involved with #1.
I'm also concerned about the assumption that relfilenode should,
or even can be, unique across an entire installation. (I suppose
widening it to 8 bytes would fix some of the hazards there, but
that bloats your buffer tag again.)
But here's the big problem: you're talking about a huge amount of
work for what seems likely to be a microscopic improvement in some
operations. Worse, we'll be taking penalties for other operations.
How will you do DropDatabaseBuffers() for instance?
CREATE DATABASE is going to be a problem, too.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: