Thread: (one more time) Patches with vacuum fixes available.
I know you guys are pretty busy with the upcoming release but I was hoping for more interest in this work. With this (which needs forward porting) we're able to cut vacuum time down from ~10minutes to under 30 seconds. The code is a nop unless you compile with special options(MMNB) specify the special vacuum flag (VLAZY) and doesn't look like it messes with anything otherwise. I was hoping to see it go into 7.0.x because of the non-intrusiveness of it and also because Vadim did it so he should understand it so that it won't cause any problems (and on the slight chance that it does, he should be able to fix it). Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long as it was ok with the rest of the development team. So can we get a go-ahead on this? :) thanks, -Alfred ----- Forwarded message from Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> ----- From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: [HACKERS] Patches with vacuum fixes available for 7.0.x Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:57:32 -0800 Message-ID: <20001207145732.X16205@fw.wintelcom.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org We recently had a very satisfactory contract completed by Vadim. Basically Vadim has been able to reduce the amount of time taken by a vacuum from 10-15 minutes down to under 10 seconds. We've been running with these patches under heavy load for about a week now without any problems except one: don't 'lazy' (new option for vacuum) a table which has just had an indexcreated on it, or at least don't expect it to take any less time than a normal vacuum would. There's three patchsets and they are available at: http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/ complete diff: http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/v.diff only lazy vacuum option to speed up index vacuums: http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/vlazy.tgz only lazy vacuum option to only scan from start of modified data: http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/mnmb.tgz Although the patches are for 7.0.x I'm hoping that they can be forward ported (if Vadim hasn't done it already) to 7.1. enjoy! -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." ----- End forwarded message ----- -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."
Sounds good to me. [Of course, I never met a patch I didn't like, or so they say.] > I know you guys are pretty busy with the upcoming release but I > was hoping for more interest in this work. > > With this (which needs forward porting) we're able to cut > vacuum time down from ~10minutes to under 30 seconds. > > The code is a nop unless you compile with special options(MMNB) > specify the special vacuum flag (VLAZY) and doesn't look like it > messes with anything otherwise. > > I was hoping to see it go into 7.0.x because of the non-intrusiveness > of it and also because Vadim did it so he should understand it so > that it won't cause any problems (and on the slight chance that it > does, he should be able to fix it). > > Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this > work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long > as it was ok with the rest of the development team. > > So can we get a go-ahead on this? :) > > thanks, > -Alfred > > ----- Forwarded message from Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> ----- > > From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: [HACKERS] Patches with vacuum fixes available for 7.0.x > Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 14:57:32 -0800 > Message-ID: <20001207145732.X16205@fw.wintelcom.net> > User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i > Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org > > We recently had a very satisfactory contract completed by > Vadim. > > Basically Vadim has been able to reduce the amount of time > taken by a vacuum from 10-15 minutes down to under 10 seconds. > > We've been running with these patches under heavy load for > about a week now without any problems except one: > don't 'lazy' (new option for vacuum) a table which has just > had an index created on it, or at least don't expect it to > take any less time than a normal vacuum would. > > There's three patchsets and they are available at: > > http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/ > > complete diff: > http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/v.diff > > only lazy vacuum option to speed up index vacuums: > http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/vlazy.tgz > > only lazy vacuum option to only scan from start of modified > data: > http://people.freebsd.org/~alfred/vacfix/mnmb.tgz > > Although the patches are for 7.0.x I'm hoping that they > can be forward ported (if Vadim hasn't done it already) > to 7.1. > > enjoy! > > -- > -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] > "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > > -- > -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] > "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> writes:
> Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this
> work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long
> as it was ok with the rest of the development team.
> So can we get a go-ahead on this? :)
If Vadim isn't sufficiently confident of it to commit it on his own
authority, I'm inclined to leave it out of 7.1. My concern is mostly
schedule. We are well into beta cycle now and this seems like way too
critical (not to say high-risk) a feature to be adding after start of
beta.
regards, tom lane
> Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> writes: > > Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this > > work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long > > as it was ok with the rest of the development team. > > So can we get a go-ahead on this? :) > > If Vadim isn't sufficiently confident of it to commit it on his own > authority, I'm inclined to leave it out of 7.1. My concern is mostly > schedule. We are well into beta cycle now and this seems like way too > critical (not to say high-risk) a feature to be adding after start of > beta. I was wondering if Vadim was hesitant because he had done this under contract. Vadim, are you concerned about reliability or are there other issues? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Tom Lane wrote: > Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> writes: > > Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this > > work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long > > as it was ok with the rest of the development team. > > So can we get a go-ahead on this? :) > > If Vadim isn't sufficiently confident of it to commit it on his own > authority, I'm inclined to leave it out of 7.1. My concern is mostly > schedule. We are well into beta cycle now and this seems like way too > critical (not to say high-risk) a feature to be adding after start of > beta. As this is post-beta release, and this isn't a bug fix, I concur with this ... its something we can easily put up on the web site as a patch to v7.1, but would prefer this not going mainstream until *after* release ...
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> writes: > > > Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this > > > work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long > > > as it was ok with the rest of the development team. > > > So can we get a go-ahead on this? :) > > > > If Vadim isn't sufficiently confident of it to commit it on his own > > authority, I'm inclined to leave it out of 7.1. My concern is mostly > > schedule. We are well into beta cycle now and this seems like way too > > critical (not to say high-risk) a feature to be adding after start of > > beta. > > I was wondering if Vadim was hesitant because he had done this under > contract. Vadim, are you concerned about reliability or are there other > issues? Irrelevant .. we are post-beta release, and this doesn't fix a bug, so it doesn't go in ...
* The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org> [001211 14:27] wrote: > On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> writes: > > > > Basically Vadim left it up to me to campaign for acceptance of this > > > > work and he said he wouldn't have a problem bringing it in as long > > > > as it was ok with the rest of the development team. > > > > So can we get a go-ahead on this? :) > > > > > > If Vadim isn't sufficiently confident of it to commit it on his own > > > authority, I'm inclined to leave it out of 7.1. My concern is mostly > > > schedule. We are well into beta cycle now and this seems like way too > > > critical (not to say high-risk) a feature to be adding after start of > > > beta. > > > > I was wondering if Vadim was hesitant because he had done this under > > contract. Vadim, are you concerned about reliability or are there other > > issues? > > Irrelevant .. we are post-beta release, and this doesn't fix a bug, so it > doesn't go in ... I'm hoping this just means it won't be investigated until the release is made? -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk."