Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock)
Дата
Msg-id 7130.1331132659@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock)  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Ответы Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock)
Список pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Just to keep things in perspective -- For a commit record to reach one
> megabyte, it would have to be a transaction that drops over 43k tables.
> Or have 64k smgr inval messages (for example, a TRUNCATE might send half
> a dozen of these messages). Or have 262k subtransactions.  Or
> combinations thereof.

> Now admittedly, a page is only 8 kB, so for a commit record to be "many
> pages long" (that is, >=3) it would require about 1500 smgr inval
> messages, or, say, about 250 TRUNCATEs (of permanent tables with at
> least one toastable field and at least one index).

What about the locks (if running hot-standby)?

> So they are undoubtely rare.  Not sure if as rare as Higgs bosons.

Even if they're rare, having a major performance hiccup when one happens
is not a side-effect I want to see from a patch whose only reason to
exist is better performance.
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RFC: Making TRUNCATE more "MVCC-safe"
Следующее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Scaling XLog insertion (was Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock)