From: Alvaro Herrera > I think seqscanning the hash table is going to be too slow; Ideriha-san > idea of having a dlist with the entries in LRU order (where each entry > is moved to head of list when it is touched) seemed good: it allows you > to evict older ones when the time comes, without having to scan the rest > of the entries. Having a dlist means two more pointers on each cache > entry AFAIR, so it's not a huge amount of memory.
Absolutely. We should try to avoid unpredictable long response time caused by an occasional unlucky batch processing. That makes the troubleshooting when the user asks why they experience unsteady response time. Regards MauMau
