Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoYfQeBXzXZ6wzJxLb8f01im4YAG216Doav+fAJ130rPwA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)  (Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we should not consider doing compression and decompression as
> free at this point in code, because we hold a buffer lock during
> recheck. Buffer locks are meant for short-term locks (it is even
> mentioned in storage/buffer/README), doing all the
> compression/decompression/detoast stuff under these locks doesn't
> sound advisable to me.  It can block many concurrent operations.

Compression and decompression might cause performance problems, but
try to access the TOAST table would be fatal; that probably would have
deadlock hazards among other problems.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Logical decoding on standby