| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Timothy D(dot) Witham" <wookie(at)osdl(dot)org>, testperf-general(at)pgfoundry(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ... |
| Date: | 2004-10-15 21:27:29 |
| Message-ID: | 26451.1097875649@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
>> I suspect the reason recalc_sigpending_tsk is so high is that the
>> original coding of PG_TRY involved saving and restoring the signal mask,
>> which led to a whole lot of sigsetmask-type kernel calls. Is this test
>> with beta3, or something older?
> Beta3, *without* Gavin or Neil's Futex patch.
Hmm, in that case the cost deserves some further investigation. Can we
find out just what that routine does and where it's being called from?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Wong | 2004-10-15 21:32:06 | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ... |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-10-15 20:38:17 | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ... |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Wong | 2004-10-15 21:32:06 | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ... |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-10-15 21:22:26 | Re: mmap (was First set of OSDL Shared Mem scalability results, some wierdness ... |