maria-developers team mailing list archive

[Sergei Golubchik <serg@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Sergey!

On Nov 25, Sergey Vojtovich wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 10:44:39AM +0100, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> > On Nov 23, Sergey Vojtovich wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 10:00:33AM +0100, Sergei Golubchik wrote:
> > > > On Nov 23, Sergey Vojtovich wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Could there be any other fix for P_S autosizing besides moving all its
> > > > dependencies to early options?
> > > No simple solution on my mind. May be initialize PFS with defaults and
> > > then reinitialize with real values?
> > 
> > perfschema creates fixed-size (*) arrays based on these values. And
> > allocates data mutexes, rwlocks, conditions there.
> > 
> > if perfschema data structures are re-initialized, all mutexes/etc have
> > to be. That's why Marc has created these "early options" in the
> > first place. To reinitialize only those few mutexes that my_getopt
> > needs, not half of the server.
> > 
> All I can see now is 19 PFS variables depending on table_definition_cache &&
> table_open_cache && max_connections && open_files_limit values. I couldn't
> easily track down further dependencies, at least number of allocated arrays
> basing on these variables is far over 19.
> 
> Could you confirm that:
> 1. we want to fix PFS autosizing along with this patch

No.

> 2. we want to avoid early initialization of these 4 server variables and
>    instead reinitialize PFS when they're autosized

No.

1. PFS autosizing can be fixed later. But assuming it will be fixed, I
wouldn't want you to do a patch now that will be completely reverted
when fixing PFS autosizing.

2. No, why?

Regards,
Sergei