Re: Automatically sizing the IO worker pool

Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>

From: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>

To: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>

Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>

Date: 2025-05-26T22:54:20Z

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 →

aio: Adjust I/O worker pool automatically.
- d1c01b79d4ae 19 (unreleased) landed
aio: Simplify pgaio_worker_submit().
- fc44f106657a 19 (unreleased) landed
aio: Remove obsolete IO worker ID references.
- b4c19da93a08 18.0 landed
- 177c1f059338 19 (unreleased) landed
aio: Regularize IO worker internal naming.
- b2afb0676337 18.0 landed
- 01d618bcd782 19 (unreleased) landed

BTW I would like to push 0001 and 0002 to master/18.  They are are not
behaviour changes, they just fix up a bunch of inconsistent (0001) and
misleading (0002) variable naming and comments to reflect reality (in
AIO v1 the postmaster used to assign those I/O worker numbers, now the
postmaster has its own array of slots to track them that is *not*
aligned with the ID numbers/slots in shared memory ie those numbers
you see in the ps status, so that's bound to confuse people
maintaining this code).  I just happened to notice that when working
on this dynamic worker pool stuff.  If there are no objections I will
go ahead and do that soon.