Hello,
I've finished reviewing the code. I already marked this patch as waiting on
author. I'll be waiting for the revised patch, then proceed to running the
program when the patch seems reasonable.
(12)
Like worker_spi, save and restore errno in signal handlers.
(13)
Remove the
Hello,
I'm reviewing this patch. I find this feature useful, so keep good work.
I've just begun the review of pg_hibernate.c, and finished reviewing other
files. pg_hibernate.c will probably take some time to review, so let me
give you the result of my review so far. I'm sorry for trivial
Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Overall I agree that following Robert's idea will increase the
time to make database server up and reach a state where apps can
connect and start operations,
I agree that warming the cache before beginning to apply WAL would
be best.
but I think
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 5:48 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
Granted, you have demonstrated that the blocks restored by
pg_hibernator can cause eviction of loaded-by-recovery blocks. But,
one can argue that pg_hibernator brought the shared-buffer contents to
to a state that is much
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 2:51 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
I don't have intimate knowledge of recovery but I think the above
assessment of recovery's operations holds true. If you still think
this is a
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Cédric Villemain ced...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Le lundi 3 février 2014 19:18:54 Gurjeet Singh a écrit :
Possible enhancements:
- Ability to save/restore only specific databases.
- Control how many BlockReaders are active at a time; to avoid I/O
storms.
FWIW,
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
I don't have intimate knowledge of recovery but I think the above
assessment of recovery's operations holds true. If you still think
this is a concern, can you please provide a bit firm example using
which I can visualize
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
And it's probably accepted by now that such a bahviour is not
catastrophic,
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
And it's probably accepted by now that such a bahviour is not
catastrophic, merely inconvenient.
I think the whole argument for having pg_hibernator is that getting
the block cache properly initialized is important. If
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
Yeap, but if it crashes before writing checkpoint record, it will lead
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
And it's probably accepted by now that such a bahviour is not
catastrophic, merely inconvenient.
I think the whole argument for having
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
The thing I was concerned about is that the system might have been in
recovery for months. What was hot at the time the base backup was
taken seems
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
If recovery has been running for a long time, then restoring
buffers from some save file created before that is probably a bad
idea, regardless of whether the buffers already loaded were read in by
recovery itself or by
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
Buffer saver process itself can crash while saving or restoring
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
IIUC on shutdown request, postmaster will send signal to BG Saver
and BG Saver will save the buffers and then postmaster will send
signal to
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
Buffer saver process itself can crash while saving or restoring
buffers.
True. That may lead to partial list of buffers being saved. And the
Le lundi 3 février 2014 19:18:54 Gurjeet Singh a écrit :
Possible enhancements:
- Ability to save/restore only specific databases.
- Control how many BlockReaders are active at a time; to avoid I/O
storms. - Be smart about lowered shared_buffers across the restart.
- Different modes of
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
Another thing is don't you want to handle SIGQUIT signal in bg saver?
I think bgworker_quickdie registered in StartBackgroundWorker() serves
the purpose just fine.
Best regards,
--
Gurjeet Singh
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
Case 2 also won't cause any buffer restores because the save-files are
On 6/4/14, 8:56 AM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2014-06-04 09:51:36 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andres Freundand...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-06-04 10:24:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
Incase of recovery, the shared buffers saved by this utility are
from
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
For sizeable shared_buffers size, the restoration of the shared
buffers can take several seconds.
Incase of recovery, the shared buffers saved by
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-06-04 14:50:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The thing I was concerned about is that the system might have been in
recovery for months. What was hot at the time the base backup was
taken seems like a poor guide to
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
The thing I was concerned about is that the system might have been in
recovery for months. What was hot at the time the base backup was
taken seems like a poor guide to what will be hot at the time of
promotion. Consider
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
For sizeable shared_buffers size, the restoration of the shared
buffers
On 2014-06-04 10:24:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems like it would be best to try to do this at cluster startup
time, rather than once
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-06-04 10:24:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems like it would
On 2014-06-04 09:51:36 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-06-04 10:24:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
Incase of recovery, the shared buffers saved by this utility are
from previous shutdown which doesn't seem to be of
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2014-06-04 09:51:36 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com
wrote:
On 2014-06-04 10:24:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
Incase of recovery, the shared buffers
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-06-04 09:51:36 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Andres Freund and...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On 2014-06-04 10:24:13 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
Incase of recovery, the shared buffers
On 2014-06-04 14:50:39 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
The thing I was concerned about is that the system might have been in
recovery for months. What was hot at the time the base backup was
taken seems like a poor guide to what will be hot at the time of
promotion. Consider a history table, for
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
IMHO, all of these caveats, would affect a very small fraction of
use-cases and are eclipsed by the benefits this extension provides in
normal cases.
I agree with you that there are only few corner cases where
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
IMHO, all of these caveats, would affect a very small fraction of
use-cases and are eclipsed by the benefits this extension provides in
normal
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:13 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
IMHO, all of these caveats, would affect a very small fraction of
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems like it would be best to try to do this at cluster startup
time, rather than once recovery has reached consistency. Of course,
that might
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Josh Kupershmidt schmi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
When the Postgres server is being stopped/shut down, the `Buffer
Saver` scans the
shared-buffers of Postgres, and stores the unique block
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
When the Postgres server is being stopped/shut down, the `Buffer
Saver` scans the
shared-buffers of Postgres, and stores the unique block identifiers of
each cached
block to the disk. This information is saved under the
On May 29, 2014 12:12 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree with you that there are only few corner cases where evicting
shared buffers by this utility would harm, but was wondering if we could
even save those, say if it would only use available free buffers. I think
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
Caveats
--
- Buffer list is saved only when Postgres is shutdown in smart and
fast modes.
That is, buffer list is not saved when database crashes, or on
immediate
shutdown.
- A reduction in
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
Caveats
--
- Buffer list is saved only when Postgres is shutdown in smart and
fast modes.
That is, buffer list is not saved
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:30 PM, Gurjeet Singh gurj...@singh.im wrote:
On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Amit Kapila amit.kapil...@gmail.com
wrote:
How about the cases when shared buffers already contain some
data:
a. Before Readers start filling shared buffers, if this cluster wishes
to
Please find attached the updated code of Postgres Hibenator. Notable
changes since the first proposal are:
.) The name has been changed to pg_hibernator (from pg_hibernate), to
avoid confusion with the ORM Hibernate.
.) Works with Postgres 9.4
.) Uses DynamicBackgroundWorker infrastructure.
.)
Please find attached the pg_hibernate extension. It is a
set-it-and-forget-it solution to enable hibernation of Postgres
shared-buffers. It can be thought of as an amalgam of pg_buffercache and
pg_prewarm.
It uses the background worker infrastructure. It registers one worker
process (BufferSaver)
42 matches
Mail list logo
