Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Merlin Moncure
Тема Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes
Дата
Msg-id CAHyXU0xmcwBNGHdDW1NOnE7nUEAEfgKCcnmvDgsmr8N34Btdig@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Ответы Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Re: Page Checksums + Double Writes  (Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> 3. Attack hint bits problem.

A large number of problems would go away if the current hint bit
system could be replaced with something that did not require writing
to the tuple itself.  FWIW, moving the bits around seems like a
non-starter -- you're trading a problem with a much bigger problem
(locking, wal logging, etc).  But perhaps a clog caching strategy
would be a win.  You get a full nibble back in the tuple header,
significant i/o reduction for some workloads, crc becomes relatively
trivial, etc etc.

My first attempt at a process local cache for hint bits wasn't perfect
but proved (at least to me) that you can sneak a tight cache in there
without significantly impacting the general case.  Maybe the angle of
attack was wrong anyways -- I bet if you kept a judicious number of
clog pages in each local process with some smart invalidation you
could cover enough cases that scribbling the bits down would become
unnecessary.  Proving that is a tall order of course, but IMO merits
another attempt.

merlin


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Misleading CREATE TABLE error
Следующее
От: Simon Riggs
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 16-bit page checksums for 9.2