On 12/1/21, 2:56 PM, "Andres Freund" <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> On 2021-12-01 20:24:25 +0000, Bossart, Nathan wrote:
>> I realize adding a new maintenance worker might be a bit heavy-handed,
>> but I think it would be nice to have somewhere to offload tasks that
>> really shouldn't impact startup and checkpointing. I imagine such a
>> process would come in handy down the road, too. WDYT?
>
> -1. I think the overhead of an additional worker is disproportional here. And
> there's simplicity benefits in having a predictable cleanup interlock as well.
Another idea I had was to put some upper limit on how much time is
spent on such tasks. For example, a checkpoint would only spend X
minutes on CheckPointSnapBuild() before giving up until the next one.
I think the main downside of that approach is that it could lead to
unbounded growth, so perhaps we would limit (or even skip) such tasks
only for end-of-recovery and shutdown checkpoints. Perhaps the
startup tasks could be limited in a similar fashion.
> I think particularly for the snapshot stuff it'd be better to optimize away
> unnecessary snapshot files, rather than making the cleanup more asynchronous.
I can look into this. Any pointers would be much appreciated.
Nathan
