Re: Removing freelist (was Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?)
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Removing freelist (was Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?) |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 2096.1327295568@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Removing freelist (was Re: Should I implement DROP INDEX CONCURRENTLY?) (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Removing freelist (was Re: Should I implement DROP
INDEX CONCURRENTLY?)
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net> wrote:
>> We should also look at having the freelist do something useful, instead of just dropping it completely.
Unfortunatelythat's probably more work...
> That's kinda my feeling as well. The free list in its current form is
> pretty much useless, but I don't think we'll save much by getting rid
> of it, because that's just a single test. The expensive part of what
> we do while holding BufFreelistLock is, I think, iterating through
> buffers taking and releasing a spinlock on each one (!).
Yeah ... spinlocks that, by definition, will be uncontested. So I think
it would be advisable to prove rather than just assume that that's a
problem.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: