From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: CLOG contention |
Date: | 2012-01-05 19:21:31 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJyRJ8caNQhUN1TWaOPDfu4MQfDtF1e0V4f2d+DGHB5hw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> Let's commit the change to 32.
>
> I would like to do that, but I think we need to at least figure out a
> way to provide an escape hatch for people without much shared memory.
> We could do that, perhaps, by using a formula like this:
>
> 1 CLOG buffer per 128MB of shared_buffers, with a minimum of 8 and a
> maximum of 32
We're talking about an extra 192KB or thereabouts and Clog buffers
will only be the size of subtrans when we've finished.
If you want to have a special low-memory option, then it would need to
include many more things than clog buffers.
Let's just use a constant value for clog buffers until the low-memory
patch arrives.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-01-05 19:26:44 | Re: CLOG contention |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-01-05 19:12:41 | Re: CLOG contention |