From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Do you know the reason for increased max latency due to xlog scaling? |
Date: | 2014-02-17 15:58:54 |
Message-ID: | 20140217155854.GE18388@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2014-02-18 00:43:54 +0900, MauMau wrote:
> Please let me ask you about your performance data on the page:
>
> http://hlinnaka.iki.fi/xloginsert-scaling/padding/
>
> I'm worried about the big increase in max latency. Do you know the cause?
> More frequent checkpoints caused by increased WAL volume thanks to enhanced
> performance?
I don't see much evidence of increased latency there? You can't really
compare the latency when the throughput is significantly different.
> Although I'm not sure this is related to what I'm asking, the following code
> fragment in WALInsertSlotAcquireOne() catched my eyes. Shouldn't the if
> condition be "slotno == -1" instead of "!="? I thought this part wants to
> make inserters to use another slot on the next insertion, when they fail to
> acquire the slot immediately. Inserters pass slotno == -1. I'm sorry if I
> misunderstood the code.
I think you're right.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2014-02-17 16:09:10 | Re: narwhal and PGDLLIMPORT |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2014-02-17 15:50:16 | Re: Decimal values in |