On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 6:33 AM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > I didn't understand that last sentence. > > Here's an attempt to write a suitable comment for the quick fix. And > I suppose effective_io_concurrency is a reasonable default. > > It's pretty hard to think of a good way to get your hands on the real > value safely from here. I wondered if there was a way to narrow this > to just GLOBALTABLESPACE_OID since that's where pg_tablespace lives, > but that doesn't work, we access other catalog too in that path. > > Hmm, it seems a bit odd that 0 is supposed to mean "disable issuance > of asynchronous I/O requests" according to config.sgml, but here 0 > will prefetch 10 buffers.
Mmmph. I'm starting to think we're not going to get a satisfactory result here unless we make this controlled by something other than effective_io_concurrency. There's just no reason to suppose that the same setting that we use to control prefetching for bitmap index scans is also going to be right for what's basically a bulk operation. Interestingly, Dilip Kumar ran into similar issues recently while working on bulk processing for undo records for zheap. In that case, you definitely want to prefetch the undo aggressively, because you're reading it front to back and backwards scans suck without prefetching. And you possibly also want to prefetch the data pages to which the undo that you are prefetching applies, but maybe not as aggressively because you're going to be doing a WAL write for each data page and flooding the system with too many reads could be counterproductive, at least if pg_wal and the rest of $PGDATA are not on separate spindles. And even if they are, it's possible that as you suck in undo pages and the zheap pages that they need to update, you might evict dirty pages, generating write activity against the data directory. Overall I'm inclined to think that we're making the same mistake here that we did with work_mem, namely, assuming that you can control a bunch of different prefetching behaviors with a single GUC and things will be OK. Let's just create a new GUC for this and default it to 10 or something and go home. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
