Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Thomas Munro
Subject Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration
Date
Msg-id CA+hUKGKzPSXYowH=Y8NiuUD8gdyD225-WHaEzXT1E0Sa8RopVQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration  (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
Responses Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration  (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
Re: MultiXact\SLRU buffers configuration  (Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 7:24 PM Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru> wrote:
> I agree that this version of eviction seems much more effective and less intrusive than RR. And it's still LRU, which
isimportant for subsystem that is called SLRU.
 
> shared->search_slotno is initialized implicitly with memset(). But this seems like a common practice.
> Also comment above "max_search = Min(shared->num_slots, MAX_REPLACEMENT_SEARCH);" does not reflect changes.
>
> Besides this patch looks good to me.

Thanks!  I chickened out of committing a buffer replacement algorithm
patch written 11 hours before the feature freeze, but I also didn't
really want to commit the GUC patch without that.  Ahh, if only we'd
latched onto the real problems here just a little sooner, but there is
always PostgreSQL 15, I heard it's going to be amazing.  Moved to next
CF.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?
Next
From: Julien Rouhaud
Date:
Subject: Re: Feature improvement: can we add queryId for pg_catalog.pg_stat_activity view?