From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: dynamically allocating chunks from shared memory |
Date: | 2010-07-26 20:27:38 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikbNe7m2=PxhmROLWyT53dS-NFXJiww7wuG=mV7@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I actually think that memory management is one of the weakest
>> elements of our current architecture
>
> I'm actually pretty impressed by the memory contexts in PostgreSQL.
> Apparently I'm not alone in that, either; a paper by Hellerstein,
> Stonebraker, and Hamilton[1] has this in section 7.2 (Memory
> Allocator):
>
> "The interested reader may want to browse the open-source PostgreSQL
> code. This utilizes a fairly sophisticated memory allocator."
>
> I think the problem here is that we don't extend that sophistication
> to shared memory.
That's one aspect of it, and the other is that we don't have much
global coordination about how we use it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-07-27 00:48:46 | Re: patch (for 9.1) string functions |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2010-07-26 19:49:05 | Re: patch (for 9.1) string functions |