From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PrivateRefCount (for 8.3) |
Date: | 2006-11-27 20:11:18 |
Message-ID: | 1164658279.3778.303.camel@silverbirch.site |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 14:42 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > int8 still seems like overkjll. When will the ref counts go above 2 on a
> > regular basis? Surely refcount=2 is just chance at the best of times.
> >
> > Refcount -> 2 bits per value, plus a simple overflow list? That would
> > allow 0,1,2 ref counts plus 3 means look in hashtable to find real
> > refcount.
>
> At two bits, would we run into contention for the byte by multiple
> backends?
No contention, its a private per-backend data structure. That's why we
want to reduce the size of it so badly.
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Dunstan | 2006-11-27 20:11:53 | Re: Storing a dynahash for an entire connection or transaction? |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-11-27 19:57:45 | Re: Day and month name localization uses wrong |