Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance tweak

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
Cc: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance tweak
Date: 2005-10-21 20:14:58
Message-ID: 25214.1129925698@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

"Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> writes:
>> Will have performance #s up in a bit.

> I have a couple of cpu-bound performance tests that I just ran with and
> without the patch. Everything is ran with n=1 until volatile issue is
> sorted out but so far I am not seeing any performance
> improvement...

Hm, what were the tests exactly? Offhand I'd expect something like a
SELECT COUNT(*) on a large but not-too-wide table to show noticeable
improvement.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Merlin Moncure 2005-10-21 20:34:09 Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance tweak
Previous Message Qingqing Zhou 2005-10-21 20:03:04 Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance tweak