Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavan Deolasee
Subject Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O
Date
Msg-id 2e78013d0701260827l37d16ec3j45a129e3b71542bf@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: Piggybacking vacuum I/O  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 1/26/07, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I'd like to see still more evidence that it's a problem before we start
> changing that piece of code. It has served us well for years.

So the TODO could be "investigate whether caching pg_clog and/or
pg_subtrans in local memory can be useful for vacuum performance".


As  Heikki suggested, we should also investigate the same for normal
backends as well.

It would also be interesting to investigate whether early setting of hint bits
can reduce subsequent writes of blocks. A typical case would be a large table
being updated heavily for a while, followed by SELECT queries. The SELECT
queries would set hint bits for the previously UPDATEd  tuples (old and new
versions) and thus cause subsequent writes of those blocks for what could
have been read-only queries.

Thanks,
Pavan

EnterpriseDB     http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-patches] pg_dump pretty_print
Next
From: Chris Browne
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: Change of pg_trigger.tg_enabled and adding