On May 18, 2008, at 1:28 AM, Greg Smith wrote:
> I just collected all the good internals information included in
> this thread and popped it onto http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/
> Hint_Bits where I'll continue to hack away at the text until it's
> readable. Thanks to everyone who answered my questions here,
> that's good progress toward clearing up a very underdocumented area.
> I note a couple of potential TODO items not on the official list
> yet that came up during this discussion:
> -Smooth latency spikes when switching commit log pages by
> preallocating cleared pages before they are needed
> -Improve bulk loading by setting "frozen" hint bits for tuple
> inserts which occur within the same database transaction as the
> creation of the table into which they're being inserted
> Did I miss anything? I think everything brought up falls either
> into one of those two or the existing "Consider having the
> background writer update the transaction status hint bits..." TODO.
Blah, sorry for the double-post, but I just remembered a few things...
Did we completely kill the idea of the bg_writer *or some other
background process* being responsible for setting all hint-bits on
dirty pages before they're written out?
Also, Simon and Tom had an idea at PGCon: Don't set hint-bits in the
back-end if the page isn't already dirty. We'd likely need some
heuristics on this... based on Luke's comments about improved CLOG
caching maybe we want to set the bits anyway if the tuples without
them set are from old transactions (idea being that pulling those
CLOG pages would be pretty expensive). Or better yet; if we have to
read a CLOG page off disk, set the bits.
This could still potentially be a big disadvantage for data
warehouses; though perhaps the way to fix that is recommend a
backgrounded vacuum after data load.
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
In response to
pgsql-performance by date
|Next:||From: Jeffrey Baker||Date: 2008-05-24 20:39:15|
|Subject: Re: Quad Xeon or Quad Opteron?|
|Previous:||From: Decibel!||Date: 2008-05-24 19:06:56|
|Subject: Re: I/O on select count(*) |