Re: Time to up bgwriter_lru_maxpages?

From: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)BlueTreble(dot)com>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "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: 2017-01-31 22:07:12
Message-ID: 427e75f7-6032-0560-787f-2e956a977612@BlueTreble.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 11/29/16 9:58 AM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>
> Considering a single SSD can do 70% of that limit, I would say yes.
>
>
> Next question becomes... should there even be an upper limit?
>
>
> Where the contortions needed to prevent calculation overflow become
> annoying?
>
> I'm not a big fan of nannyism in general, but the limits on this
> parameter seem particularly pointless. You can't write out more buffers
> than exist in the dirty state, nor more than implied
> by bgwriter_lru_multiplier. So what is really the worse that can happen
> if you make it too high?

Attached is a patch that ups the limit to INT_MAX / 2, which is the same
as shared_buffers.
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)

Attachment Content-Type Size
lru_maxpages.patch text/plain 1.2 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2017-01-31 22:10:05 Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2017-01-31 21:59:19 Re: ICU integration