Re: [Testperf-general] Re: ExclusiveLock

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, testperf-general(at)pgfoundry(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Testperf-general] Re: ExclusiveLock
Date: 2004-11-20 16:14:00
Message-ID: 21059.1100967240@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, 2004-11-18 at 22:55, Tom Lane wrote:
>> If it is a problem, the LockBuffer calls in RelationGetBufferForTuple
>> would be the places showing contention delays.

> You say this as if we can easily check that.

I think this can be done with oprofile ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-11-20 16:17:48 Re: Trouble with plpgsql on 7.4.6
Previous Message Hans-Jürgen Schönig 2004-11-20 15:50:08 Interesting parsing problem ...