On 7 March 2017 at 19:22, David Rowley <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> That may need tweaking. Likely it could be smaller if we had some sort >>> of bloom filter to mark if the transaction had obtained any AEL locks, >>> that way it could skip. Initially I really didn't want to make the >>> patch too complex. I had thought that a fairly large hash table would >>> fix the problem well enough, as quite possibly most buckets would be >>> empty and non empty buckets have short lists. >> >> ISTM that we should mark each COMMIT if it has an AEL, so we can avoid >> any overhead in the common case. >> >> So an additional sub-record for the commit/abort wal record, via >> include/access/xact.h > > That would be ideal if we could do that, but doing that for so many > possible transaction IDs seems impractical. Don't understand this. I'm talking about setting a flag on commit/abort WAL records, like the attached. We just need to track info so we can set the flag at EOXact and we're done. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
partial.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
