pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Bossart, Nathan <bossartn@amazon.com>
Cc: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg@gmail.com>
Cc: Amul Sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: O(n) tasks cause lengthy startups and checkpoints
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2023 16:23:05 -0400
Message-ID: <1056498.1680466985@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230402193030.GA25018@nathanxps13>
References: <20221130051833.GB1677223@nathanxps13>
	<CALj2ACVod5vJS7M7LqmPXfnhmxRPKB2CQKYBvUK3iqhomzqh1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALj2ACUCvhtXO7Ay-7ogxEBAvt74VCajAj=CqWDDTLsZT4+zTA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20221201214026.GA1799688@nathanxps13>
	<CALj2ACWupmFrhv4ZOdiB8rrt2UuC8bpCO_v=Sbu+fFEoSgYoNw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20221202191507.GA2277157@nathanxps13>
	<CALj2ACW1F-T866iaqA_9h9fA+Axdyc86CHz7_k55RGH5HH2rtA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20230203054808.GA83788@nathanxps13>
	<20230217234344.GA3357392@nathanxps13>
	<1031491.1680457205@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<20230402193030.GA25018@nathanxps13>

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 01:40:05PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> * Why does LookupCustodianFunctions think it needs to search the
>> constant array?

> The order of the tasks in the array isn't guaranteed to match the order in
> the CustodianTask enum.

Why not?  It's a constant array, we can surely manage to make its
order match the enum.

>> * The original proposal included moving RemovePgTempFiles into this
>> mechanism, which I thought was probably the most useful bit of the
>> whole thing.  I'm sad to see that gone, what became of it?

> I postponed that based on advice from upthread [1].  I was hoping to start
> a dedicated thread for that immediately after the custodian infrastructure
> was committed.  FWIW I agree that it's the most useful task of what's
> proposed thus far.

Hmm, given Andres' objections there's little point in moving forward
without that task.

			regards, tom lane





view thread (89+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <1056498.1680466985@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../1056498.1680466985@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/1056498.1680466985@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, nathandbossart@gmail.com, bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com, robertmhaas@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, bossartn@amazon.com, orlovmg@gmail.com, sulamul@gmail.com, bruce@momjian.us
  Subject: Re: O(n) tasks cause lengthy startups and checkpoints
  In-Reply-To: <1056498.1680466985@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox