From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
        Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
        "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Protect syscache from bloating with negative cache entries
In-reply-to: 
 <CAMsr+YHziSok-AM=krEQ+HaRQzst4+M1+2WGYqZw_i6w9vVBvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20161219.201505.11562604.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>
 <CA+Tgmob_ksTOgmbXhno+k5XXPOK+-JYYLoU3MpXuutP4bH7gzA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMsr+YHziSok-AM=krEQ+HaRQzst4+M1+2WGYqZw_i6w9vVBvA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>
	message dated "Tue, 20 Dec 2016 22:47:17 +0800"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <30867.1482246558.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 10:09:18 -0500
Message-ID: <30868.1482246558@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> On 20 December 2016 at 21:59, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> We could implement this by having
>> some process, like the background writer,
>> SendProcSignal(PROCSIG_HOUSEKEEPING) to every process in the system
>> every 10 minutes or so.

> ... on a rolling basis.

I don't understand why we'd make that a system-wide behavior at all,
rather than expecting each process to manage its own cache.

			regards, tom lane


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