| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PoC] Improve dead tuple storage for lazy vacuum |
| Date: | 2022-11-30 07:30:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoB4isa8p8dgcvnc-YX_uXk24xPPkEhk7XNKhzu6R6Kr3A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 6:47 PM John Naylor
<john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 9:54 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > [v11]
>
> There is one more thing that just now occurred to me: In expanding the use of size classes, that makes rebasing and reworking the shared memory piece more work than it should be. That's important because there are still some open questions about the design around shared memory. To keep unnecessary churn to a minimum, perhaps we should limit size class expansion to just one (or 5 total size classes) for the near future?
Make sense. We can add size classes once we have a good design and
implementation around shared memory.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-11-30 07:45:49 | Re: psql - factor out echo code |
| Previous Message | ZHU XIAN WEN | 2022-11-30 07:29:14 | Re: Large Pages and Super Pages for PostgreSQL |