Re: [HACKERS] Broken O(n^2) avoidance in wal segment recycling.

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Broken O(n^2) avoidance in wal segment recycling.
Date: 2019-05-07 03:03:13
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+S5nGJBDnsTuz8M-RzHxeJ2RyFR-HSoYH3oY_F4eYbaw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 2:45 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> I just hit this bad a couple times during some testing. Under load, with
> 2500 segments to recycle, it took well over a minute.

I wonder if this played a part in the wal_recycle=off-for-ZFS thing.

--
Thomas Munro
https://enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2019-05-07 03:07:56 Re: Heap lock levels for REINDEX INDEX CONCURRENTLY not quite right?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-05-07 03:00:23 Re: [HACKERS] Broken O(n^2) avoidance in wal segment recycling.