|From:||Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>|
|To:||Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>|
|Cc:||Jaime Casanova <jaime(dot)casanova(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>|
|Subject:||Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)|
|Views:||Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox|
On Wed, Feb 1, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Unless there are objections I will push this later this afternoon.
> Done. Let's get on with the show -- please post a rebased WARM.
Please see rebased patches attached. There is not much change other than
the fact the patch now uses new catalog maintenance API.
Do you think we should apply the patch to remove ItemPointerCopy()? I will
rework the HeapTupleHeaderGetNextTid() after that. Not that it depends on
removing ItemPointerCopy(), but decided to postpone it until we make a call
on that patch.
BTW I've run now long stress tests with the patch applied and see no new
issues, even when indexes are dropped and recreated concurrently (includes
my patch to fix CIC bug in the master though). In another 24 hour test,
WARM could do 274M transactions where as master did 164M transactions. I
did not drop and recreate indexes during this run.
Pavan Deolasee http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
|Next Message||Magnus Hagander||2017-02-02 13:13:46||Re: Enabling replication connections by default in pg_hba.conf|
|Previous Message||Amit Kapila||2017-02-02 12:44:57||Re: Index corruption with CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY|