Re: autovac issue with large number of tables

From: Kasahara Tatsuhito <kasahara(dot)tatsuhito(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Jim Nasby <nasbyj(at)amazon(dot)com>
Cc: Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: autovac issue with large number of tables
Date: 2020-07-31 06:26:44
Message-ID: CAP0=ZVK0KD9gAOc9bzsMYt7Q5e9E4jdqD8aRQsBpSdEKyU9X7g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 3:49 AM Jim Nasby <nasbyj(at)amazon(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm in favor of trying to improve scheduling (especially allowing users
> to control how things are scheduled), but that's a far more invasive
> patch. I'd like to get something like this patch in without waiting on a
> significantly larger effort.

BTW, Have you tried the patch suggested in the thread below?

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180629.173418.190173462.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jp

The above is a suggestion to manage statistics on shared memory rather
than in a file, but I think this feature may mitigate your problem.
I think that feature has yet another performance challenge, but it
might be worth a try.
The above patch will also require a great deal of effort to get into
the PostgreSQL-core, but I'm curious to see how well it works for this
problem.

Best regards,

--
Tatsuhito Kasahara
kasahara.tatsuhito _at_ gmail.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2020-07-31 07:06:38 Re: Internal key management system
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2020-07-31 05:55:12 Re: Fast DSM segments