From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru, pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, hannuk(at)google(dot)com, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded |
Date: | 2023-06-14 19:51:39 |
Message-ID: | 20230614195139.tz7w6j24hxk4gnwc@awork3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2023-06-13 16:55:12 +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Tue, 13 Jun 2023 09:55:36 +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru> wrote in
> > Postgres backend is "thick" not because of large number of local
> > variables.
> > It is because of local caches: catalog cache, relation cache, prepared
> > statements cache,...
> > If they are not rewritten, then backend still may consume a lot of
> > memory even if it will be thread rather then process.
> > But threads simplify development of global caches, although it can be
> > done with DSM.
>
> With the process model, that local stuff are flushed out upon
> reconnection. If we switch to the thread model, we will need an
> expiration mechanism for those stuff.
Isn't that just doing something like MemoryContextDelete(TopMemoryContext) at
the end of proc_exit() (or it's thread equivalent)?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2023-06-14 19:53:53 | Re: Should heapam_estimate_rel_size consider fillfactor? |
Previous Message | Mikhail Gribkov | 2023-06-14 19:49:15 | Re: On login trigger: take three |