Re: RecoveryInProgress() has critical side effects

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, amul sul <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: RecoveryInProgress() has critical side effects
Date: 2021-11-16 20:42:23
Message-ID: 20211116204223.2a2qbd3xervd27ve@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2021-11-16 15:19:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Hm. I think this might included a bunch of convoluting factors that make it
> > hard to judge the actual size of the performance difference.
>
> Yes, I think so, too.

FWIW I ran that pgench thing I presented upthread, and I didn't see any
meaningful and repeatable performance difference 354a1f8d220, ad26ee28250 and
0002 applied ontop of ad26ee28250. The run-to-run variance is way higher than
the difference between the changes.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mark Dilger 2021-11-16 21:02:44 Re: Granting SET and ALTER SYSTE privileges for GUCs
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-11-16 20:40:54 Re: Non-superuser subscription owners