| From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Bharath Rupireddy <bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Anastasia Lubennikova <a(dot)lubennikova(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Paul Guo <guopa(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Performance degradation of REFRESH MATERIALIZED VIEW |
| Date: | 2021-05-24 22:30:13 |
| Message-ID: | 20598870-55b5-e70c-e4b9-5b8da9375403@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/24/21 8:21 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2021-05-24 12:37:18 +0200, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Another option might be changes in the binary layout - 5% change is well
>> within the range that could be attributed to this, but it feels very
>> hand-wavy and more like an excuse than real analysis.
>
> I don't think 5% is likely to be explained by binary layout unless you
> look for an explicitly adverse layout.
>
Yeah, true. But I'm out of ideas what might be causing the regression
and how to fix it :-(
>
>> Hmmm, thanks for reminding us that patch. Why did we reject that approach in
>> favor of the current one?
>
> Don't know about others, but I think it's way too fragile.
>
Is it really that fragile? Any particular risks you have in mind? Maybe
we could protect against that somehow ... Anyway, that change would
certainly be for PG15.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-05-25 00:14:36 | Re: Testing autovacuum wraparound (including failsafe) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2021-05-24 22:05:55 | Re: Issue on catalogs.sgml |