Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Atri Sharma
Subject Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay
Date
Msg-id CAOeZVidbiUuDP09QLhRSV21ZUTAF5kyOj0-e4YwUBDUb5N24-w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Limiting setting of hint bits by read-only queries; vacuum_delay  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
> This is pretty similar to the proposal Atri and I just recently made.
> I am 100% in agreement that something must be done here...SELECT has
> none of the i/o mitigation features that vacuum has.  Is your idea
> better? probably (although you have to give a small penalty for a user
> facing tunable) but we need testing against real world workloads, or
> at least a much better synthetic one than pgbench, which per recent
> discussions is probably the top objective of the project (a
> performance farm, etc.).
>

I have been working on some tests for improving the performance in
case of bulk INSERTs for our patch. So far, I think it has some
relation to the visibility map optimization, which our patch seems to
be affecting.

Some more testing is in place, which has been delayed due to me being
wound up in other projects. Now that they are complete, I will resume
testing next week or so.

Regards,

Atri


--
Regards,

Atri
l'apprenant



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: DROP OWNED BY fails to drop privileges granted by non-owners (was Re: [GENERAL] Bug, Feature, or what else?)
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)