Re: [PATCH] 2PC state files on shared memory

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [PATCH] 2PC state files on shared memory
Дата
Msg-id 15725.1249745345@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [PATCH] 2PC state files on shared memory  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: [PATCH] 2PC state files on shared memory  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Quite aside from that, the fixed size of shared memory makes this seem
>> pretty impractical.

> Most state files are small. If one doesn't fit in the area reserved for
> this, it's written to disk as usual. It's just an optimization.

What evidence do you have for that assumption?  And what's "small" anyway?
I think setting the size parameter for this would be a frightfully
difficult problem; the fact that average installations wouldn't use it
doesn't make that any better for those who would.  After our bad
experiences with fixed-size FSM, I'm pretty wary of introducing new
fixed-size structures that the user is expected to figure out how to
size.

> I'm a bit disappointed by the performance gains. I would've expected
> more, given a decent battery-backed-up cache to buffer the WAL fsyncs.
> But it looks like they're still causing the most overhead, even with a
> battery-backed-up cache.

If you can't demonstrate order-of-magnitude speedups, I think we
shouldn't touch this.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruce Momjian
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Alpha releases: How to tag
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] 2PC state files on shared memory