Re: Block level parallel vacuum WIP
| От | Alex Ignatov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Block level parallel vacuum WIP |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | [email protected] обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Block level parallel vacuum WIP (Michael Paquier <[email protected]>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 23.08.2016 15:41, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Masahiko Sawada <[email protected]> wrote: >> As for PoC, I implemented parallel vacuum so that each worker >> processes both 1 and 2 phases for particular block range. >> Suppose we vacuum 1000 blocks table with 4 workers, each worker >> processes 250 consecutive blocks in phase 1 and then reclaims dead >> tuples from heap and indexes (phase 2). > So each worker is assigned a range of blocks, and processes them in > parallel? This does not sound performance-wise. I recall Robert and > Amit emails on the matter for sequential scan that this would suck > performance out particularly for rotating disks. Rotating disks is not a problem - you can always raid them and etc. 8k allocation per relation once per half an hour that is the problem. Seq scan is this way = random scan... Alex Ignatov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: