| From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Does RelCache/SysCache shrink except when relations are deleted? |
| Date: | 2011-09-29 15:43:38 |
| Message-ID: | CAHyXU0xWiQEn7MUrp3LvsdfM382W0=V0qVT4vGK8P_gdk9+wWQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I can't really explain why people seem to keep wanting to create
> hundreds of thousands or even millions of tables, but it's not like
> MauMau's customer is the first one to try to do this, and I'm sure
> they won't be the last. I don't want to de-optimize the more common
> (and sensible) cases too much, but "slow" still trumps "fails
> outright".
Yeah -- maybe baby steps in the right direction would be track cache
memory usage and add instrumentation so the user could get a readout
on usage -- this would also help us diagnose memory issues in the
field. Also, thinking about it more, a DISCARD based cache flush
(DISCARD CACHES TO xyz) wrapping a monolithic LRU sweep could help
users deal with these cases without having to figure out how to make
an implementation that pleases everyone.
merlin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Linas Virbalas | 2011-09-29 15:44:59 | Re: Hot Backup with rsync fails at pg_clog if under load |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-09-29 15:37:56 | Re: pg_regress input/output directory option |