Re: Automatically sizing the IO worker pool

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Automatically sizing the IO worker pool
Date: 2026-04-08 02:24:57
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+WZfFjwE-nDpKbzq=M37GntjcqvKdzV+dLkDgXEWppdg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Apr 8, 2026 at 2:09 PM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Seems like there should be two fields. One saying "notify postmaster again"
> > and one "postmaster start a worker". The former would only be cleared by
> > postmaster after the timeout.
>
> Good idea. V7 has two tweaks:
>
> * separate grow and grow_signal_sent flags, as you suggested
> * it also applies the io_worker_launch_delay to cancelled grow requests

Oh, but that logic should of course be moved below the "time in the
past" check. Will do...

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2026-04-08 02:28:13 Re: Our ABI diff infrastructure ignores enum SysCacheIdentifier
Previous Message Andres Freund 2026-04-08 02:20:55 Re: Automatically sizing the IO worker pool