| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RC2 and open issues |
| Date: | 2004-12-21 04:00:31 |
| Message-ID: | 2309.1103601631@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> You need a "clock sweep" like BSD uses (and probably others).
No, that's *fundamentally* wrong.
The reason we are going to the trouble of maintaining a complicated
cache algorithm like ARC is so that we can tell the heavily used pages
from the lesser used ones. To throw away that knowledge in favor of
doing I/O with a plain clock sweep algorithm is just wrong.
What's more, I don't even understand what clock sweep would mean given
that the ordering of the list is constantly changing.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-12-21 04:05:36 | Re: RC2 and open issues |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2004-12-21 03:57:34 | Re: rc1 packaged ... |