Re: [HACKERS] mdnblocks is an amazing time sink in huge relations

From: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] mdnblocks is an amazing time sink in huge relations
Date: 1999-10-12 13:57:53
Message-ID: 199910121357.JAA02356@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> It seems to me that mdnblocks should assume that all segments
> previously verified to be of length RELSEG_SIZE are still of that
> length, and only do an _mdnblocks() call on the last element of the
> segment chain. That way the number of kernel interactions needed
> is a constant independent of the number of segments in the table.
> (This doesn't make truncation of the relation by a different backend
> any more or less dangerous; we're still hosed if we don't get a
> notification before we try to do something with the relation.
> I think that is fixed, and if it's not this doesn't make it worse.)
>
> Any objections?

Sounds great. Now that the segments work properly, it is time for some
optimization. Vadim has complained about the lseek() from day-1.
Someday he wants a shared catalog cache to prevent that from being
needed.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1999-10-12 13:58:42 Re: [HACKERS] Re: [INTERFACES] Next release is 7.0(?)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1999-10-12 13:56:10 Re: [HACKERS] Features for next release