| From: | "Tang, Haiying" <tanghy(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jamison, Kirk" <k(dot)jamison(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Amit Kapila' <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: [Patch] Optimize dropping of relation buffers using dlist |
| Date: | 2020-12-25 02:23:21 |
| Message-ID: | 0235137ac1da4b65a6662d4801d5267f@G08CNEXMBPEKD05.g08.fujitsu.local |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Kirk,
>Perhaps there is a confusing part in the presented table where you indicated master(512), master(256), master(128).
>Because the master is not supposed to use the BUF_DROP_FULL_SCAN_THRESHOLD and just execute the existing default full scan of NBuffers.
>Or I may have misunderstood something?
Sorry for your confusion, I didn't make it clear. I didn't use BUF_DROP_FULL_SCAN_THRESHOLD for master.
Master(512) means the test table amount in master is same with patched(512), so does master(256) and master(128).
I meant to mark 512/256/128 to distinguish results in master for the three threshold(applied in patches) .
Regards
Tang
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2020-12-25 02:40:14 | Re: New Table Access Methods for Multi and Single Inserts |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2020-12-25 01:41:51 | Re: Parallel Inserts in CREATE TABLE AS |