MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <f3xxfrkafjxpyqxywcxricxgyizjirfceychyxsgn7bwjp5eda@kwbduhy7tfmu>
 <CAAKRu_bfwBzg7=Zy88st6gBJf97Wkd3k=+m1ecApn=59SwmKSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <pj4kgtdrevvkfbmlri6p27belctxru7ytyprcb6v74c7zbh3l6@m4dcu2rljedv>
In-Reply-To: <pj4kgtdrevvkfbmlri6p27belctxru7ytyprcb6v74c7zbh3l6@m4dcu2rljedv>
From: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2026 17:13:34 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAAKRu_bbZFF9dMOOMopOMy6BgvCxEGeWmcrCvwffc6ibGE+ZdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: AIO / read stream heuristics adjustments for index prefetching
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>,
	Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>, Tomas Vondra <tv@fuzzy.cz>,
 Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAAKRu_bbZFF9dMOOMopOMy6BgvCxEGeWmcrCvwffc6ibGE%2BZdQ%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 11:47=E2=80=AFAM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> =
wrote:
>
> > On some level, relying on worker mode overhead feels fragile. If
> > worker overhead decreases=E2=80=94say, by moving to IO worker threads=
=E2=80=94we won't
> > be able to rely on this to keep the distance to an advantageous level.
>
> I don't see why lower overhead would prevent this from working?

needed_wait has to be true to increase the readahead distance and for
io_uring, when data was in the kernel buffer cache, needed_wait is
false, meaning the distance doesn't increase. Worker mode didn't have
this problem because of overhead. So needed_wait is true for workers.
But, now that we will have combine_distance, I guess we don't need to
rely on workers having overhead. So we are saying that
readahead_distance is completely irrelevant for copying from the
kernel buffer cache and only combine_distance matters for that now,
right?

> > Yea, I think running ahead far enough to get bigger IOs needs to
> > happen and can't be based on the consumer having to wait.
>
> What do you think about the updated patch to achieve that that I posted?

Will post separately.

- Melanie