Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Changing semantics of autovacuum_cost_limit

From: Galy Lee <lee(dot)galy(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Changing semantics of autovacuum_cost_limit
Date: 2007-03-26 07:01:54
Message-ID: 46076FE2.4030602@oss.ntt.co.jp (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi all,

As AUTOVACUUM is having multiple workers now, the semantics of
autovacuum_cost_limit also need to be redefined.

Currently, autovacuum_cost_limit is the accumulated cost that will cause
one single worker vacuuming process to sleep.  It is used to restrict
the I/O consumption of a single vacuum worker. When there are N workers,
the I/O consumption by autovacuum workers can be increased by N times.
This autovacuum_cost_limit semantics produces unpredictable I/O
consumption for multiple-autovacuum-workers.

One simple idea is to set cost limit for every worker to:
autovacuum_cost_limit / max_autovacuum_workers. But for scenarios which
have fewer active workers, it is obvious unfair to active workers. So a
better way is to set cost limit of every active worker to:
autovacuum_cost_limit/autovacuum_active_workers. This ensures the I/O
consumption of autovacuum is stable.

Worker can be extended to have its own cost_limit on share memory. When
a worker is brought up or a worker has finished its work, launcher
recalculates:

   worker_cost_limit= (autovacuum_cost_limit/autovacuum_active_workers)

and sets new value for each active workers.

The above approach requires launcher can change cost delay setting of
workers on-the-fly. This can be achieved by forcing VACUUM refers to the
cost delay setting in its worker’s share memory every vacuum_delay_point.

Any comments or suggestions?

Best Regards

Galy Lee
lee(dot)galy(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp
NTT Open Source Software Center

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Zoltan BoszormenyiDate: 2007-03-26 09:31:17
Subject: Re: Crash bug in 8.2.3 on Solaris 10/Sparc
Previous:From: Ioseph KimDate: 2007-03-26 03:30:51
Subject: Re: Server-side support of all encodings

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group