MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAAKRu_ZngzqnEODc7LmS1NH04Kt6Y9huSjz5pp7+DXhrjDA0gw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD21AoC=b09pzWNyPYuti0M2DQwy57CGF9UWWb_+v=gdWeNG=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAKRu_bR2VrTUskR24GkXV15SxPaCiHYD=soOuWZcT-rGDcA8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD21AoB=EC6wzjjqDXKmNEhu_BhGg0g_Gc50yh_zvXqiDC_OSg@mail.gmail.com>
 <7121ac43-d6ae-33ca-8ddc-538b0c6ab492@amazon.com> <CAFBsxsGLDxNus6=8LiQihrjvOrZuu7JdpC3ykDk2vzciTU6m+A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFBsxsGLDxNus6=8LiQihrjvOrZuu7JdpC3ykDk2vzciTU6m+A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2023 22:19:11 +0900
Message-ID: <CAD21AoCqggJsNeWsFbgZjH9coQdMZBE3opZ4JMzuO8cdNTcFFA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Should vacuum process config file reload more often
To: John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprisedb.com>
Cc: Jim Nasby <nasbyj@amazon.com>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com>, 
	Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD21AoCqggJsNeWsFbgZjH9coQdMZBE3opZ4JMzuO8cdNTcFFA%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 4:47=E2=80=AFPM John Naylor <john.naylor@enterprised=
b.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 12:42=E2=80=AFAM Jim Nasby <nasbyj@amazon.com> wro=
te:
> >
> > Doesn't the dead tuple space grow as needed? Last I looked we don't all=
ocate up to 1GB right off the bat.
>
> Incorrect.
>
> > Of course, if the patch that eliminates the 1GB vacuum limit gets commi=
tted the situation will be even worse.
>
> If you're referring to the proposed tid store, I'd be interested in seein=
g a reproducible test case with a m_w_m over 1GB where it makes things wors=
e than the current state of affairs.

And I think that the tidstore makes it easy to react to
maintenance_work_mem changes. We don't need to enlarge it and just
update its memory limit at an appropriate time.

Regards,

--=20
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com