| From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Relation extension scalability |
| Date: | 2016-03-17 03:42:28 |
| Message-ID: | CAFiTN-v8NQ10RucWPg0cwQ2qhLptLsL7PUTwxk0CXVwLX8Ht9Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Well any value we choose will be very arbitrary. If we look at it from the
> point of maximum absolute disk space we allocate for relation at once,
> the 4MB limit would represent 2.5 orders of magnitude change. That sounds
> like enough for one release cycle, I think we can further tune it if the
> need arises in next one. (with my love for round numbers I would have
> suggested 8MB as that's 3 orders of magnitude, but I am fine with 4MB as
> well)
>
I have modified the patch, this contains the max limit on extra pages,
512(4MB) pages is the max limit.
I have measured the performance also and that looks equally good.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| multi_extend_v8.patch | text/x-patch | 9.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-03-17 04:01:02 | Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive |
| Previous Message | Haribabu Kommi | 2016-03-17 03:41:57 | Re: Parallel Aggregate |