| From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock |
| Date: | 2023-11-20 11:12:43 |
| Message-ID: | CAFiTN-vJRxrgQXzomw3Tyu6NxqLBO8d84nhSqCuDJjn5H6=2PA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 2:37 PM Andrey M. Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> wrote:
> > On 20 Nov 2023, at 13:51, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > 2) Do we really need one separate lwlock tranche for each SLRU?
> >
> > IMHO if we use the same lwlock tranche then the wait event will show
> > the same wait event name, right? And that would be confusing for the
> > user, whether we are waiting for Subtransaction or Multixact or
> > anything else. Is my understanding no correct here?
>
> If we give to a user multiple GUCs to tweak, I think we should give a way to understand which GUC to tweak when they observe wait times.
+1
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2023-11-20 11:23:45 | Re: Adding facility for injection points (or probe points?) for more advanced tests |
| Previous Message | Картышов Иван | 2023-11-20 11:10:43 | Re: [HACKERS] make async slave to wait for lsn to be replayed |