| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Time to up bgwriter_lru_maxpages? |
| Date: | 2017-02-02 00:27:40 |
| Message-ID: | 20170202002740.rtvcrteryelvhvhj@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2017-02-02 09:22:46 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> > Speaking of which... I have a meeting in 15 minutes to discuss moving to a
> > server with 4TB of memory. With current limits shared buffers maxes at 16TB,
> > which isn't all that far in the future. While 16TB of shared buffers might
> > not be a good idea, it's not going to be terribly long before we start
> > getting questions about it.
>
> Time for int64 GUCs?
I don't think the GUC bit is the hard part. We'd possibly need some
trickery (like not storing bufferid in BufferDesc anymore) to avoid
increasing memory usage.
- Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-02-02 00:28:35 | Re: Time to up bgwriter_lru_maxpages? |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-02-02 00:22:46 | Re: Time to up bgwriter_lru_maxpages? |