pgsql: TODO item not needed anymore now that the buffer cache is

Started by Bruce Momjianabout 19 years ago3 messagescomitters
Jump to latest
#1Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us

Log Message:
-----------
TODO item not needed anymore now that the buffer cache is
scan-resistant:

<
< * Allow free-behind capability for large sequential scans, perhaps using
< posix_fadvise()
<
< Posix_fadvise() can control both sequential/random file caching and
< free-behind behavior, but it is unclear how the setting affects other
< backends that also have the file open, and the feature is not supported
< on all operating systems.

Modified Files:
--------------
pgsql/doc:
TODO (r1.2197 -> r1.2198)
(http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/doc/TODO.diff?r1=1.2197&amp;r2=1.2198)
pgsql/doc/src/FAQ:
TODO.html (r1.698 -> r1.699)
(http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/doc/src/FAQ/TODO.html.diff?r1=1.698&amp;r2=1.699)

#2Kris Jurka
books@ejurka.com
In reply to: Bruce Momjian (#1)
Re: pgsql: TODO item not needed anymore now that the buffer cache is

On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, Bruce Momjian wrote:

Log Message:
-----------
TODO item not needed anymore now that the buffer cache is
scan-resistant:

<
< * Allow free-behind capability for large sequential scans, perhaps using
< posix_fadvise()
<
< Posix_fadvise() can control both sequential/random file caching and
< free-behind behavior, but it is unclear how the setting affects other
< backends that also have the file open, and the feature is not supported
< on all operating systems.

This todo item is about telling the OS cache that we don't want these
buffers kept around, not about pg's own buffer cache. So I think it's
still valid.

Kris Jurka

#3Bruce Momjian
bruce@momjian.us
In reply to: Kris Jurka (#2)
Re: pgsql: TODO item not needed anymore now that the buffer cache is

Kris Jurka wrote:

On Fri, 1 Jun 2007, Bruce Momjian wrote:

Log Message:
-----------
TODO item not needed anymore now that the buffer cache is
scan-resistant:

<
< * Allow free-behind capability for large sequential scans, perhaps using
< posix_fadvise()
<
< Posix_fadvise() can control both sequential/random file caching and
< free-behind behavior, but it is unclear how the setting affects other
< backends that also have the file open, and the feature is not supported
< on all operating systems.

This todo item is about telling the OS cache that we don't want these
buffers kept around, not about pg's own buffer cache. So I think it's
still valid.

Agreed, re-added, and clarified it is for the kernel cache:

* Allow free-behind capability for large sequential scans to avoid
kernel cache spoiling

Posix_fadvise() can control both sequential/random file caching and
free-behind behavior, but it is unclear how the setting affects other
backends that also have the file open, and the feature is not supported
on all operating systems.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +