MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMp4U1cDJzb96KJXT-hNuf7L4KaYUiXWs6KSe01so--mBoop8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <71abd264-1911-46a0-a25b-079a7cfa577a@iki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <71abd264-1911-46a0-a25b-079a7cfa577a@iki.fi>
From: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:17:19 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAKRu_YyuqbRaVO-zkoeRLFeNtF_jX-faGSGH4h3JB6ckORWMg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: autoprewarm_dump_now
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>
Cc: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQsNGA0YzRjyDQqNCw0L3QuNC90LA=?= <vilensipkdm@gmail.com>, 
	pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAAKRu_YyuqbRaVO-zkoeRLFeNtF_jX-faGSGH4h3JB6ckORWMg%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 4, 2025 at 10:04=E2=80=AFAM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi=
> wrote:
>
> In apw_load_buffers(), we also load the file into (DSM) memory. There's
> no similar 1 GB limit in dsm_create(), but I think it's a bit
> unfortunate that the array needs to be allocated upfront upon loading.

Unrelated to this problem, but I wondered why autoprewarm doesn''t
launch background workers for each database simultaneously instead of
waiting for each one to finish a db before moving onto the next one.
Is it simply to limit the number of bgworkers taking up resources?

- Melanie