Re: SSI tuning points

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SSI tuning points
Date: 2011-06-19 15:10:57
Message-ID: 4DFDCB31020000250003E8BF@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:

>> I'm certainly open to suggestions for better wording.

> How about something like this:
>
> When the system is forced to combine multiple page-level predicate
> locks into a single relation-level predicate lock because the
> predicate lock table is short of memory, an increase in the rate of
> serialization failures may occur. You can avoid this by increasing
> max_pred_locks_per_transaction.
>
> A sequential scan will always necessitate a table-level predicate
> lock. This can result in an increased rate of serialization failures.
> It may be helpful to encourage the use of index scans by reducing
> random_page_cost or increasing cpu_tuple_cost. Be sure to

That does seem better. Thanks.

-Kevin

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Cédric Villemain 2011-06-19 15:12:38 Re: the big picture for index-only scans
Previous Message Jeff Shanab 2011-06-19 15:04:33 Libpq enhancement