| From: | John Naylor <john(dot)naylor(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(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: | 2023-03-08 04:40:09 |
| Message-ID: | CAFBsxsFF4q7vxOgcJ==tCtuZ2o34sGcuo0=V=TSdkatXgpN7ug@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 8:25 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> > 1. Make it optional to track chunk memory space by a template
parameter. It might be tiny compared to everything else that vacuum does.
That would allow other users to avoid that overhead.
> > 2. When context block usage exceeds the limit (rare), make the
additional effort to get the precise usage -- I'm not sure such a top-down
facility exists, and I'm not feeling well enough today to study this
further.
>
> I prefer option (1) as it's straight forward. I mentioned a similar
> idea before[1]. RT_MEMORY_USAGE() is defined only when the macro is
> defined. It might be worth checking if there is visible overhead of
> tracking chunk memory space. IIRC we've not evaluated it yet.
Ok, let's try this -- I can test and profile later this week.
--
John Naylor
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) | 2023-03-08 04:40:20 | RE: [Proposal] Add foreign-server health checks infrastructure |
| Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2023-03-08 04:35:18 | Re: [PATCH] Use indexes on the subscriber when REPLICA IDENTITY is full on the publisher |