Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm.

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Beena Emerson <memissemerson(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal : For Auto-Prewarm.
Date: 2017-02-27 13:48:26
Message-ID: 726e45cb-58c2-6fc9-d0ed-7175006fa276@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/26/17 11:46, Robert Haas wrote:
> I don't see
> a solution other than launching a separate worker for each database,
> which seems like it could be extremely expensive if there are many
> databases.

You don't have to start all these workers at once. Starting one and not
starting the next one until the first one is finished should be fine.
It will have the same serial behavior that the patch is proposing anyway.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Surafel Temesgen 2017-02-27 13:58:19 Disallowing multiple queries per PQexec()
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-02-27 13:40:26 Re: WIP: Covering + unique indexes.