Re: SSI SLRU strategy choices - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: SSI SLRU strategy choices
Date
Msg-id 4D1B43B80200002500038D8D@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SSI SLRU strategy choices  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: SSI SLRU strategy choices  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> If these limitations become a problem, you can always change them.
> A couple of zeroes at the start of the pg_clog filenames aren't
> going to bother anyone, I don't think.  Not so sure about your new
> proposed design's space usage.
I guess that's a call the community can make now -- if a
serializable transaction which is not flagged as read only remains
open long enough for over a billion other transactions to commit, is
it OK for the old transaction to be automatically canceled?  Is it
worth messing with the SLRU limits to double that?
Beyond a certain point you have transaction ID wrap-around, so at
that point this would be the least of your troubles -- canceling
the old transaction might even be helpful.  I thought that was at 2
billion, but Heikki was saying it's at 1 billion in an earlier post.
-Kevin


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Anyone for SSDs?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Extensions, patch v16