Re: parametric block size?
От | Fabien COELHO |
---|---|
Тема | Re: parametric block size? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | alpine.DEB.2.10.1407241845110.3626@sto обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: parametric block size? (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>> Note that I was more asking about the desirability of the feature, >> the implementation is another, although also relevant, issue. To me >> it is really desirable given the potential performance impact, but >> maybe we should not care about 10%? > > 10% performance improvement sounds good, no doubt. What will happen to > performance for people with the same block size? I mean, if you run a > comparison of current HEAD vs. patched with identical BLCKSZ, is there a > decrease in performance? I expect there will be some, although I'm not > sure to what extent. I do not understand the question. Do you mean to compare current 'compile time set block size' vs an hypothetical 'adaptative initdb-time block size' version, which does not really exist yet? I cannot answer that, but I would not expect significant differences. If there is a significant performance impact, this would be sure no good. > People who pg_upgrade for example will be stuck with whatever blcksz > they had on the original installation and so will be unable to benefit > from this improvement. Sure. What I'm looking at is just to have a postmaster executable which tolerates several block sizes, but they must be set & chosen when initdb-ing anyway. > I admit I'm not sure where's the breakeven point, i.e. what's the loss > we're willing to tolerate. It might be pretty small. Minimal performance impact wrt the current version, got that! -- Fabien.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: