Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
Date: 2016-03-27 12:18:58
Message-ID: 20160327121858.zrmrjegmji2ymnvr@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-03-27 17:45:52 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> > On what hardware did you run these tests?
>
>
> IBM POWER 8 MACHINE.
>
> Architecture: ppc64le
> Byte Order: Little Endian
> CPU(s): 192
> Thread(s) per core: 8
> Core(s) per socket: 1
> Socket(s): 24
> NUMA node(s): 4

What's sizeof(BufferDesc) after applying these patches? It should better
be <= 64...

Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Emre Hasegeli 2016-03-27 12:35:29 Re: [PATCH] we have added support for box type in SP-GiST index
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2016-03-27 12:15:52 Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics