3 ms·
Yo! Author here, I’ll be around if anyone’s got questions!
by simeonGriggs 6mo ago
Yo! Author here, I’ll be around if anyone’s got questions!
- jeeybee 6mo agoDid you test with fillfactor < 100 on the queue table? With HOT updates, status changes can reuse dead space without creating new index entries, which seems like it could significantly delay the onset of the death spiral?
- EffCompute 6mo ago[dead]
- mattashii 6mo agoIf the status column changes, and an index depends on the contents of that status column (be it by referencing it in its columns, or in the index's WHERE filter) then an update of the status column will prevent the HOT optimization from being applied.
- dondraper36 6mo agoIf I understood correctly, the queue implementation in the blog post holds a transaction while an operation is in progress. I see the advice to make it as short as possible, but why can’t we update the status column to, say, “processing” and avoid potentially long transactions at all?
- oxidant 6mo agoThis works well for jobs that are long-ish. You need another process to sweep for orphaned jobs and requeue or fail them. Add a timestamp of when it got picked up to keep track
- Yeroc 6mo agoHow does this solution compare with using pg_squeeze? We ran into this situation with a queuing solution and we've been testing it out... seems to work.
- danelliot 6mo ago[dead]