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

Re: New FSM patch

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: New FSM patch
Date: 2008-09-11 12:16:49
Message-ID: 48C90C31.6070405@enterprisedb.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Zdenek Kotala wrote:
> Does we need random_bool to spread workload? It seems to me a useless, 
> because it also invokes one backend to use more pages instead of using 
> one which is already in buffer cache.I think that it should generate a 
> lot of extra i/o. Do not forget WAL full page write for firstime 
> modified page.

random_bool() is gone in the latest version of the patch, in favor of a 
"next pointer". You must be looking at an old version, and I must've 
forgotten to update the link in the Wiki. That change was discussed in 
the "New FSM allocation policy" thread.

Anyway, here's is the new version for your convenience, and I also added 
a paragraph to the README, mentioning that the tree is degenerated from 
the right.

-- 
   Heikki Linnakangas
   EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment: fsm-lazy-3.patch.gz
Description: application/x-gzip (43.5 KB)

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2008-09-11 12:20:30
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of GUC units code
Previous:From: Merlin MoncureDate: 2008-09-11 12:10:23
Subject: Re: Transaction Snapshots and Hot Standby

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