Re: Extension Enhancement: Buffer Invalidation in pg_buffercache - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From | Japin Li |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Extension Enhancement: Buffer Invalidation in pg_buffercache |
Date | |
Msg-id | MEYP282MB166993107CB3858B7524EA9FB62EA@MEYP282MB1669.AUSP282.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Extension Enhancement: Buffer Invalidation in pg_buffercache (Palak Chaturvedi <chaturvedipalak1911@gmail.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Extension Enhancement: Buffer Invalidation in pg_buffercache
|
List | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 03 Jul 2023 at 16:26, Palak Chaturvedi <chaturvedipalak1911@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Thomas, > Thank you for your suggestions. I have added the sql in the meson > build as well. > > On Sat, 1 Jul 2023 at 03:39, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 10:47 PM Palak Chaturvedi >> <chaturvedipalak1911@gmail.com> wrote: >> > pgbench=# select count(pg_buffercache_invalidate(bufferid)) from >> > pg_buffercache where relfilenode = >> > pg_relation_filenode('pgbench_accounts'::regclass); >> >> Hi Palak, >> >> Thanks for working on this! I think this will be very useful for >> testing existing workloads but also for testing future work on >> prefetching with AIO (and DIO), work on putting SLRUs (or anything >> else) into the buffer pool, nearby proposals for caching buffer >> mapping information, etc etc. >> >> Palak and I talked about this idea a bit last week (stimulated by a >> recent thread[1], but the topic has certainly come up before), and we >> discussed some different ways one could specify which pages are >> dropped. For example, perhaps the pg_prewarm extension could have an >> 'unwarm' option instead. I personally thought the buffer ID-based >> approach was quite good because it's extremely simple, while giving >> the user the full power of SQL to say which buffers. Half a table? >> Visibility map? Everything? Root page of an index? I think that's >> probably better than something that requires more code and >> complication but is less flexible in the end. It feels like the right >> level of rawness for something primarily of interest to hackers and >> advanced users. I don't think it matters that there is a window >> between selecting a buffer ID and invalidating it, for the intended >> use cases. That's my vote, anyway, let's see if others have other >> ideas... >> >> We also talked a bit about how one might control the kernel page cache >> in more fine-grained ways for testing purposes, but it seems like the >> pgfincore project has that covered with its pgfadvise_willneed() and >> pgfadvise_dontneed(). IMHO that project could use more page-oriented >> operations (instead of just counts and coarse grains operations) but >> that's something that could be material for patches to send to the >> extension maintainers. This work, in contrast, is more tangled up >> with bufmgr.c internals, so it feels like this feature belongs in a >> core contrib module. >> >> Some initial thoughts on the patch: >> >> I wonder if we should include a simple exercise in >> contrib/pg_buffercache/sql/pg_buffercache.sql. One problem is that >> it's not guaranteed to succeed in general. It doesn't wait for pins >> to go away, and it doesn't retry cleaning dirty buffers after one >> attempt, it just returns false, which I think is probably the right >> approach, but it makes the behaviour too non-deterministic for simple >> tests. Perhaps it's enough to include an exercise where we call it a >> few times to hit a couple of cases, but not verify what effect it has. >> >> It should be restricted by role, but I wonder which role it should be. >> Testing for superuser is now out of fashion. >> >> Where the Makefile mentions 1.4--1.5.sql, the meson.build file needs >> to do the same. That's because PostgreSQL is currently in transition >> from autoconf/gmake to meson/ninja[2], so for now we have to maintain >> both build systems. That's why it fails to build in some CI tasks[3]. >> You can enable CI in your own GitHub account if you want to run test >> builds on several operating systems, see [4] for info. >> >> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAFSGpE3y_oMK1uHhcHxGxBxs%2BKrjMMdGrE%2B6HHOu0vttVET0UQ%40mail.gmail.com >> [2] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Meson >> [3] http://cfbot.cputube.org/palak-chaturvedi.html >> [4] https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blob_plain;f=src/tools/ci/README;hb=HEAD I think, zero is not a valid buffer identifier. See src/include/storage/buf.h. + bufnum = PG_GETARG_INT32(0); + if (bufnum < 0 || bufnum > NBuffers) + { + ereport(ERROR, + (errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE), + errmsg("buffernum is not valid"))); + + } If we use SELECT pg_buffercache_invalidate(0), it will crash. -- Regrads, Japin Li.
pgsql-hackers by date: