From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, dipiets(at)amazon(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: use a non-locking initial test in TAS_SPIN on AArch64 |
Date: | 2025-01-08 23:07:44 |
Message-ID: | 1759000.1736377664@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> AFAICT TAS_SPIN() is only used for s_lock(), which doesn't appear to be
> used by LWLocks. But I did retry my test from upthread without
> pg_stat_statements and was surprised to find a reproducible 4-6%
> regression.
On what hardware?
I just spent an hour beating on my M4 Pro (the 14-core variant)
and could not detect any outside-the-noise effect of this patch,
with or without pg_stat_statements loaded. There does seem to be
a small fraction-of-a-percent-ish benefit. But the run-to-run
variation with 60-second "pgbench -S" tests is a couple of percent,
so I can't say that that's real.
I do feel pretty sure that the patch doesn't hurt on this
class of hardware.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2025-01-08 23:09:47 | Re: Parameter NOT NULL to CREATE DOMAIN not the same as CHECK (VALUE IS NOT NULL) |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2025-01-08 22:56:04 | Re: AIO v2.2 |