Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nMJNJ58=Z_9_NO81oTq8zCgsomHxDUxEH+Rvj6B-m09oSg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>)
Responses Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE
List pgsql-hackers
On 17 January 2013 15:14, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> wrote:
> On 17.01.2013 16:53, Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:49 AM, Pavan Deolasee
>> <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>
>>> May be you've already addressed that concern with the proven
>>> performance numbers, but I'm not sure.
>>
>>
>> It would be nice to hear what Heikki's reasons were for adding
>> PD_ALL_VISIBLE in the first place.
>
>
> The idea was to avoid clearing the bit in the VM page on every update, when
> the bit is known to not be set, ie. when the PD_ALL_VISIBLE flag is not set.
> I assumed the traffic and contention on the VM page would be a killer
> otherwise. I don't remember if I ever actually tested that though. Maybe I
> was worrying about nothing and hitting the VM page on every update is ok.

Presumably we remember the state of the VM so we can skip the re-visit
after every write?

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Slave enters in recovery and promotes when WAL stream with master is cut + delay master/slave
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE