Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins
Date
Msg-id 20140827141235.GB7046@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2014-08-26 22:19:47 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> writes:

> > I would say that the issue most deserving of performance testing is your
> > sizing of the linear-search array --- it's not obvious that 8 is a good
> > size.
> 
> It's about the size of a cacheline on all common architectures, that's
> how I found it. I don't think it makes a very big difference whether we
> make it 4 or 12, but outside of that range I think it'll be unlikely to
> be beneficial. The regression tests never go about three or four pins or
> so currently, so I think that's a number unlikely to regularly be
> crossed in practice.

FWIW scanning a minmax index will keep three pages pinned IIRC
(metapage, current revmap page, current regular page).

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimization for updating foreign tables in Postgres FDW
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Hardening pg_upgrade