Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration

On 08.07.2020 10:03, Andrey M. Borodin wrote:
>
>> 2 июля 2020 г., в 17:02, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> написал(а):
>>
>>> On 15 May 2020, at 02:03, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Generally in such cases, condition variables would work.  In the
>>> attached PoC, the reader side gets no penalty in the "likely" code
>>> path.  The writer side always calls ConditionVariableBroadcast but the
>>> waiter list is empty in almost all cases.  But I couldn't cause the
>>> situation where the sleep 1000u is reached.
>> The submitted patch no longer applies, can you please submit an updated
>> version?  I'm marking the patch Waiting on Author in the meantime.
> Thanks, Daniel! PFA V2
>
> Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

1) The first patch is sensible and harmless, so I think it is ready for 
committer. I haven't tested the performance impact, though.

2) I like the initial proposal to make various SLRU buffers 
configurable, however, I doubt if it really solves the problem, or just 
moves it to another place?

The previous patch you sent was based on some version that contained 
changes for other slru buffers numbers: 'multixact_offsets_slru_buffers' 
and 'multixact_members_slru_buffers'. Have you just forgot to attach 
them? The patch message "[PATCH v2 2/4]" hints that you had 4 patches)
Meanwhile, I attach the rebased patch to calm down the CFbot. The 
changes are trivial.

2.1) I think that both min and max values for this parameter are too 
extreme. Have you tested them?

+               &multixact_local_cache_entries,
+               256, 2, INT_MAX / 2,

2.2) MAX_CACHE_ENTRIES is not used anymore, so it can be deleted.

3) No changes for third patch. I just renamed it for consistency.

-- 
Anastasia Lubennikova
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company