Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The LRU moves each time we do FileRead or FileWrite, not just on
> open/close operations.
Sure, but those still require kernel calls, so the cost of a couple of
pointer swings is negligible. There's no way that the logical
complexity of sometimes maintain
Simon Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can we do the same for the file descriptors in fd.c?
I haven't seen any indication that fd.c is a performance bottleneck,
so I don't see the point.
Also, there is an external constraint: we can't simply have thousands
of open file descriptors; on most pla
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
> Can we do the same for the file descriptors in fd.c?
>
> Very often the total number of file descriptors is much less than the
> maximum, so it would make sense to only maintain the LRU when we are
> using more than 50%-75% of the maximum.
>
I am not ag
Moving from -committers to -hackers:
On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 23:08 -0300, Tom Lane wrote:
> On small-to-middling databases this wins
> because maintaining the LRU list is a waste of time.
Sounds good.
Can we do the same for the file descriptors in fd.c?
Very often the total number of file descr
