| From: | Alexandre Felipe <o(dot)alexandre(dot)felipe(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: aio: worker: Free SMGR objects when idle |
| Date: | 2026-09-28 04:45:55 |
| Message-ID: | CAE8JnxPibEuLUDR7TCbw_4+HeHEn_xatjGs=bLqJ=N6uiG2qAQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 27, 2026 at 5:23 PM shihao zhong <zhong950419(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Touching an LRU and calling FirstCallSinceLastCheckpoint() on every IO
> puts work back in the hot path, which is what Andres objected to as well.
>
I am aware of those objections, this proposal is very different type of
work.
No inval subscription as in my v1 (that involves shared memory, LWLock's,
iterating and filtering irrelevant messages). And also no global spin lock
as
Nazir's v1.
About touching LRU, I thought that the I/O worker already updated the LRU
list every operation, does it go through a different path?
Regards,
Alexandre
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Henson Choi | 2026-09-28 04:55:15 | Re: Row pattern recognition |
| Previous Message | solai v | 2026-09-28 04:34:00 | Re: NOT NULL NOT ENFORCED |