Re: Page replacement algorithm in buffer cache

From: Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila(at)huawei(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Page replacement algorithm in buffer cache
Date: 2013-04-02 17:26:23
Message-ID: CAM-w4HNxFckMid3DEq8tOM3vsFdPY+EzV0NTkbmwCWOqp8yAeA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I'm confused by this thread. We *used* to maintain an LRU. The whole
reason for the clock-sweep algorithm is precisely to avoid maintaining
a linked list of least recently used buffers since the head of that
list is a point of contention.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2013-04-02 17:35:10 Re: Page replacement algorithm in buffer cache
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-04-02 17:20:41 Re: Page replacement algorithm in buffer cache