Re: BAS_BULKREAD vs read stream

From: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: BAS_BULKREAD vs read stream
Date: 2025-04-07 19:24:43
Message-ID: CAAKRu_b7ROR0SB6fSdRBzwJ4peWEOqYGBCL0G1AuKe0Z+JMoYA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Apr 6, 2025 at 4:15 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> I think we should consider increasing BAS_BULKREAD TO something like
> Min(256, io_combine_limit * (effective_io_concurrency + 1))

Do you mean Max? If so, this basically makes sense to me.
Overall, I think even though the ring is about reusing buffers, we
have to think about how many IOs that reasonably is -- which this
formula does.

You mentioned testing with 8MB, did you see some sort of clipp
anywhere between 256 and 8MB?

> I experimented some whether SYNC_SCAN_REPORT_INTERVAL should be increased, and
> couldn't come up with any benefits. It seems to hurt fairly quickly.

So, how will you deal with it when the BAS_BULKREAD ring is bigger?

- Melanie

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2025-04-07 19:48:20 Re: Adding pg_dump flag for parallel export to pipes
Previous Message Andres Freund 2025-04-07 19:24:42 Re: AIO v2.5