Re: Clock sweep not caching enough B-Tree leaf pages?
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>,
Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2015-04-15T02:02:49Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote: > Why is that good? We did discuss this before. I've recapped some of what I believe to be the most salient points below. > I think that people were all too quick to dismiss the idea of a wall > time interval playing some role here (at least as a defense against > correlated references, as a correlated reference period). I suppose > that that's because it doesn't fit with an intuition that says that > that kind of interval ought to be derived algebraically - magic delay > settings are considered suspect. Yep, Tom gave that reason here: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/11258.1397673898@sss.pgh.pa.us But there was also this point from Andres - gettimeofday is not free: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20140416075307.GC3906@awork2.anarazel.de And this point from me - this can degrade to random eviction under high pressure: http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CA+TgmoayUxr55zuEaPP6d2XByicJWACC9Myyn5aT4TiNdSJqYw@mail.gmail.com You'll notice that my proposal avoids all three of those objections. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
Replace the BufMgrLock with separate locks on the lookup hashtable and
- 5d5087363d7c 8.1.0 cited