Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Masahiko Sawada
Тема Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations
Дата
Msg-id CAD21AoCc48SseGYWFyxaddz41MWDyyOyQDdmNWTfHOpYeNZmww@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Ответы Re: Removing more vacuumlazy.c special cases, relfrozenxid optimizations  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Dec 16, 2021 at 5:27 AM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 1:48 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote:
> > * I'm still working on the optimization that we discussed on this
> > thread: the optimization that allows the final relfrozenxid (that we
> > set in pg_class) to be determined dynamically, based on the actual
> > XIDs we observed in the table (we don't just naively use FreezeLimit).
>
> Attached is v4 of the patch series, which now includes this
> optimization, broken out into its own patch. In addition, it includes
> a prototype of opportunistic freezing.
>
> My emphasis here has been on making non-aggressive VACUUMs *always*
> advance relfrozenxid, outside of certain obvious edge cases. And so
> with all the patches applied, up to and including the opportunistic
> freezing patch, every autovacuum of every table manages to advance
> relfrozenxid during benchmarking -- usually to a fairly recent value.
> I've focussed on making aggressive VACUUMs (especially anti-wraparound
> autovacuums) a rare occurrence, for truly exceptional cases (e.g.,
> user keeps canceling autovacuums, maybe due to automated script that
> performs DDL). That has taken priority over other goals, for now.

Great!

I've looked at 0001 patch and here are some comments:

@@ -535,8 +540,16 @@ heap_vacuum_rel(Relation rel, VacuumParams *params,

                    xidFullScanLimit);
        aggressive |= MultiXactIdPrecedesOrEquals(rel->rd_rel->relminmxid,

                   mxactFullScanLimit);
+       skipwithvm = true;
        if (params->options & VACOPT_DISABLE_PAGE_SKIPPING)
+       {
+               /*
+                * Force aggressive mode, and disable skipping blocks using the
+                * visibility map (even those set all-frozen)
+                */
                aggressive = true;
+               skipwithvm = false;
+       }

        vacrel = (LVRelState *) palloc0(sizeof(LVRelState));

@@ -544,6 +557,7 @@ heap_vacuum_rel(Relation rel, VacuumParams *params,
        vacrel->rel = rel;
        vac_open_indexes(vacrel->rel, RowExclusiveLock, &vacrel->nindexes,
                                         &vacrel->indrels);
+       vacrel->aggressive = aggressive;
        vacrel->failsafe_active = false;
        vacrel->consider_bypass_optimization = true;

How about adding skipwithvm to LVRelState too?

---
                        /*
-                        * The current block is potentially skippable;
if we've seen a
-                        * long enough run of skippable blocks to
justify skipping it, and
-                        * we're not forced to check it, then go ahead and skip.
-                        * Otherwise, the page must be at least
all-visible if not
-                        * all-frozen, so we can set
all_visible_according_to_vm = true.
+                        * The current page can be skipped if we've
seen a long enough run
+                        * of skippable blocks to justify skipping it
-- provided it's not
+                        * the last page in the relation (according to
rel_pages/nblocks).
+                        *
+                        * We always scan the table's last page to
determine whether it
+                        * has tuples or not, even if it would
otherwise be skipped
+                        * (unless we're skipping every single page in
the relation). This
+                        * avoids having lazy_truncate_heap() take
access-exclusive lock
+                        * on the table to attempt a truncation that just fails
+                        * immediately because there are tuples on the
last page.
                         */
-                       if (skipping_blocks && !FORCE_CHECK_PAGE())
+                       if (skipping_blocks && blkno < nblocks - 1)

Why do we always need to scan the last page even if heap truncation is
disabled (or in the failsafe mode)?

Regards,

-- 
Masahiko Sawada
EDB:  https://www.enterprisedb.com/



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Greg Nancarrow
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: row filtering for logical replication
Следующее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Column Filtering in Logical Replication