> Or... It seems to me that we have been observing something on the order
> of 10x-20x slowdown for vacuuming a table. I think this is WAY
> overcompensating for the original problems, and would cause it's own
> problem as mentioned above. Since the granularity of delay seems to be
> the problem can we do more work between delays? Instead of sleeping
> after every page (I assume this is what it's doing) perhaps we should
> sleep every 10 pages,
I also think doing more than one page per sleep is advantageous since
it would still allow the OS to do it's readahead optimizations.
I suspect those would fall flat if only one page is fetched per sleep.
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Andreas Pflug||Date: 2003-11-04 13:55:34|
|Subject: Re: Experimental patch for inter-page delay in VACUUM|
|Previous:||From: Alexey Mahotkin||Date: 2003-11-04 12:41:44|
|Subject: UPPER()/LOWER() and UTF-8|