Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock

From: "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock
Date: 2023-11-20 09:07:18
Message-ID: 3768683D-7AEA-44A9-B3D7-B4F3E17170D4@yandex-team.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On 20 Nov 2023, at 13:51, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 2) Do we really need one separate lwlock tranche for each SLRU?
>
> IMHO if we use the same lwlock tranche then the wait event will show
> the same wait event name, right? And that would be confusing for the
> user, whether we are waiting for Subtransaction or Multixact or
> anything else. Is my understanding no correct here?

If we give to a user multiple GUCs to tweak, I think we should give a way to understand which GUC to tweak when they observe wait times.

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Antonin Houska 2023-11-20 09:07:53 Stop the search once replication origin is found
Previous Message John Naylor 2023-11-20 09:05:43 Re: Question about the Implementation of vector32_is_highbit_set on ARM