Re: patch for new feature: Buffer Cache Hibernation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mitsuru IWASAKI
Subject Re: patch for new feature: Buffer Cache Hibernation
Date
Msg-id 20110505.191035.71476022.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: patch for new feature: Buffer Cache Hibernation  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: patch for new feature: Buffer Cache Hibernation  (Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi, thanks for good suggestions.

> > Postgres usually starts with ZERO buffer cache.  By saving the buffer
> > cache data structure into hibernation files just before shutdown, and
> > loading them at startup, postgres can start operations with the saved
> > buffer cache as the same condition as just before the last shutdown.
> 
> This seems like a lot of complication for rather dubious gain.  What
> happens when the DBA changes the shared_buffers setting, for instance?

It was my first concern actually.  Current implementation is stopping
reading hibernation file when detecting the size mismatch among
shared_buffers and hibernation file.  I think it is a safety way.
As Alvaro Herrera mentioned, it would be possible to adjust copying
buffer bloks, but changing shared_buffers setting is not so often I
think.

> How do you protect against the cached buffers getting out-of-sync with
> the actual disk files (especially during recovery scenarios)?  What

Saving DB buffer cahce is called at shutdown after finishing
bgwriter's final checkpoint process, so dirty-buffers should not exist
I believe.
For recovery scenarios, I need to research it though...
Could you describe what is need to be consider?

> about crash-induced corruption in the cache file itself (consider the
> not-unlikely possibility that init will kill the database before it's
> had time to dump all the buffers during a system shutdown)?  Do you have

I think this is important point.  I'll implement validation function for
hibernation file.

> any proof that writing out a few GB of buffers and then reading them
> back in is actually much cheaper than letting the database re-read the
> data from the disk files?

I think this means sequential-read vs scattered-read.
The largest hibernation file is for buffer blocks, and sequential-read
from it would be much faster than scattered-read from database file
via smgrread() block by block.
As Greg Stark suggested, re-reading from database file based on buffer
descriptors was one of implementation candidates (it can reduce
storage consumption for hibernation), but I chose creating buffer
blocks raw image file and reading it for the performance.


Thanks


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Backpatching of "Teach the regular expression functions to do case-insensitive matching"
Next
From: Mitsuru IWASAKI
Date:
Subject: Re: patch for new feature: Buffer Cache Hibernation