Simon Riggs <simon.ri...@enterprisedb.com> writes: > On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 at 16:28, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> If we do those things, do we need a wasted-work counter at all?
> The wasted work counter works well to respond to heavy read-only > traffic and also avoids wasted compressions for write-heavy workloads. > So I still like it the best. This argument presumes that maintenance of the counter is free, which it surely is not. I don't know how bad contention on that atomically-updated variable could get, but it seems like it could be an issue when lots of processes are acquiring snapshots. regards, tom lane