From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Turning off HOT/Cleanup sometimes |
Date: | 2015-04-16 14:21:04 |
Message-ID: | 20150416142104.GI2361@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-04-16 10:20:20 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I think you're failing to consider that in the patch there is a
> distinction between read-only page accesses and page updates. During a
> page update, HOT cleanup is always done even with the patch, so there
> won't be any additional bloat that would not be there without the
> patch.
That's not really true (and my benchmark upthread proves it). The fact
that hot pruning only happens when we can get a cleanup lock means that
we can end up with more pages that are full, if we prune on select less
often. Especially if SELECTs are more frequent than write accesses -
pretty darn common - the likelihood of SELECTs getting the lock is
correspondingly higher.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2015-04-16 14:41:54 | Re: Turning off HOT/Cleanup sometimes |
Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2015-04-16 14:15:25 | Re: Turning off HOT/Cleanup sometimes |