| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)kaigai(dot)gr(dot)jp>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Largeobject access controls |
| Date: | 2009-10-06 16:17:01 |
| Message-ID: | 15563.1254845821@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai(at)ak(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> writes:
> I rebased the largeobject access controls patch to the CVS HEAD
> because of the patch confliction to the default ACL patch.
Quick comment on this --- I think that using a syscache for large
objects is probably not a good idea. There is no provision in the
catcache code for limiting the cache size anymore, and that means that
anybody who touches a large number of large objects is going to blow out
memory. We removed the old cache limit code because that seemed most
sensible for the use of the caches for regular catalog objects, but
I don't think LOs will have the same characteristics with respect to
either number of objects or locality of access.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-06 16:24:32 | doc/src/sgml/Makefile versus VPATH |
| Previous Message | Csaba Nagy | 2009-10-06 15:48:11 | Re: moving system catalogs to another tablespace |