Re: AIO v2.0
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: AIO v2.0 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5zmklvg6jagkrl3tu73wdtkrhzzcaibuzmk4kbbjeegvp6j4rz@k3uutbif4qnr обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: AIO v2.0 (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: AIO v2.0
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2024-12-19 17:34:29 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > My current thoughts around this are that we should generally, independent of > > io_uring, increase the FD limit ourselves. > > I'm seriously down on that, because it amounts to an assumption that > we own the machine and can appropriate all its resources. If ENFILE > weren't a thing, it'd be all right, but that is a thing. We have no > business trying to consume resources the DBA didn't tell us we could. Arguably the configuration *did* tell us, by having a higher hard limit... I'm not saying that we should increase the limit without a bound or without a configuration option, btw. As I had mentioned, the problem with relying on increasing the soft limit that is that it's not generally sensible to do so, because it causes a bunch of binaries to do be weirdly slow. Another reason to not increase the soft rlimit is that doing so can break programs relying on select(). But opting into a higher rlimit, while obviously adhering to the hard limit and perhaps some other config knob, seems fine? Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: