Tom Lane wrote:

> Actually, I had forgotten that we were using the pg_database flatfile
> for purposes other than authentication checks.  In particular, we need
> it during backend startup to map from database name to database OID,
> without which it's impossible to locate the system catalogs for the
> target database.  It's pretty hard to see a way around that one.
> We could grovel through pg_database itself, as indeed is done to rebuild
> the flatfile during system start.  But that's certainly not going to be
> fast in cases where there are enough DBs to make the flatfile slow.

Also, IIRC flatfiles were introduced precisely to avoid having to read
the catalogs manually.

> So on third thought, Alvaro's right: the only real solution here is to
> adopt a more efficient representation of the flat files.  Maybe some
> sort of simple hashtable arrangement would work.  (Rendering them not so
> flat anymore...)

As long as there's a simple API, there should be no problem.

(Except that it would be nice to be able to build the file incrementally
...  If we have to write out a million lines each time a millionth user
is created, there will still be a bottleneck at CREATE USER time.)

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

-- 
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance

Reply via email to