Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cgyA2-0001ad-NJ for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:30:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cgyA2-0006rh-1q for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:30:38 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cgyA0-0006r9-Rl for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:30:37 +0000 Received: from momjian.us ([72.94.173.45]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy9x-0004uk-Nk for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:30:35 +0000 Received: from bruce by momjian.us with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cgy9w-0004cp-60; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:30:32 -0500 Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:30:32 -0500 From: Bruce Momjian To: Alvaro Herrera Cc: Pavan Deolasee , Jaime Casanova , Haribabu Kommi , Tomas Vondra , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) Message-ID: <20170223183032.GL20486@momjian.us> References: <20170223182341.GK20486@momjian.us> <20170223182609.ymowqb7pj3m4vlbx@alvherre.pgsql> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170223182609.ymowqb7pj3m4vlbx@alvherre.pgsql> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Pg-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 03:26:09PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 03:03:39PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > > > > As I remember, WARM only allows > > > > a single index-column change in the chain. Why are you seeing such a > > > > large performance improvement? I would have thought it would be that > > > > high if we allowed an unlimited number of index changes in the chain. > > > > > > The second update in a chain creates another non-warm-updated tuple, so > > > the third update can be a warm update again, and so on. > > > > Right, before this patch they would be two independent HOT chains. > > No, they would be a regular update chain, not HOT updates. Well, let's walk through this. Let's suppose you have three updates that stay on the same page and don't update any indexed columns --- that would produce a HOT chain of four tuples. If you then do an update that changes an indexed column, prior to this patch, you get a normal update, and more HOT updates can be added to this. With WARM, we can join those chains and potentially trim the first HOT chain as those tuples become invisible. Am I missing something? -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers