Gavin Sherry wrote: > Neil and I spoke with Jan briefly last week and he mentioned a few > different approaches he'd been tossing over. Firstly, for alternative > runs, start X% on from the LRU, so that we aren't scanning clean buffers > all the time. Secondly, follow something like the approach you've > mentioned above but remember the offset. So, if we're scanning 10%, after > 10 runs we will have written out all buffers. > > I was also thinking of benchmarking the effect of changing the algorithm > in StrategyDirtyBufferList(): currently, for each iteration of the loop we > read a buffer from each of T1 and T2. I was wondering what effect reading > T1 first then T2 and vice versa would have on performance. I haven't > thought about this too hard, though, so it might be wrong headed.
So we are all thinking in the same direction. We might have only a few days to finalize this before final release. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
