Re: Relation extension scalability

From: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Relation extension scalability
Date: 2016-03-17 08:01:26
Message-ID: 56EA6456.1030206@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 17/03/16 04:42, Dilip Kumar wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com
> <mailto:petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> Well any value we choose will be very arbitrary. If we look at it
> from the point of maximum absolute disk space we allocate for
> relation at once, the 4MB limit would represent 2.5 orders of
> magnitude change. That sounds like enough for one release cycle, I
> think we can further tune it if the need arises in next one. (with
> my love for round numbers I would have suggested 8MB as that's 3
> orders of magnitude, but I am fine with 4MB as well)
>
>
> I have modified the patch, this contains the max limit on extra pages,
> 512(4MB) pages is the max limit.
>
> I have measured the performance also and that looks equally good.
>

Great.

Just small notational thing, maybe this would be simpler?:
extraBlocks = Min(512, lockWaiters * 20);

--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Petr Jelinek 2016-03-17 08:05:41 Re: Reworks of CustomScan serialization/deserialization
Previous Message Fabien COELHO 2016-03-17 07:57:24 Re: [BUGS] pgbench -C -M prepared gives an error