From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Clock sweep not caching enough B-Tree leaf pages? |
Date: | 2014-04-18 15:14:58 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ92CcyVm7oAxL3nnAuOc4g28W+dDGC+pYCCACmnHP_rw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> Because all the usage counts are the same, the eviction at
>> this point is completely indiscriminate. We're just as likely to kick
>> out a btree root page or a visibility map page as we are to kick out a
>> random heap page, even though the former have probably been accessed
>> several orders of magnitude more often. That's clearly bad.
>
> That's not clear at all. In that circumstance regardless of what page
> you evict you're incurring precisely one page fault i/o when the page
> is read back in.
I am a bit confused by this remark. In *any* circumstance when you
evict you're incurring precisely one page fault I/O when the page is
read back in. That doesn't mean that the choice of which page to
evict is irrelevant.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-04-18 15:15:34 | Re: How can we make beta testing better? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-04-18 15:06:21 | Re: DISCARD ALL (Again) |