Horton

Re: heap vacuum & cleanup locks

Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-11-09T23:10:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Make VACUUM avoid waiting for a cleanup lock, where possible.

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes:
>> heapgetpage() gets a page and a pin, but holds the pin until it reads
>> the next page. Wow!
>
>> That is both annoying and very dumb. It should hold the pin long
>> enough to copy the data and then release the pin.
>
> I don't find that anywhere near as obvious as you seem to.  I think you
> are trying to optimize for the wrong set of conditions.

ISTM we should optimise to access the cachelines in the buffer once.
Holding a pin and re-accessing the buffer via main memory seems pretty
bad plan to me. Which conditions are being optimised by doing that?

> I will also note that the behavior of holding pin for as long as we are
> stopped on a particular tuple is not specific to seqscans.

Agreed. Bad things may happen in more than one place.

-- 
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services