From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Sergey Konoplev <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Use MAP_HUGETLB where supported (v3) |
Date: | 2013-10-30 15:11:04 |
Message-ID: | 4022.1383145864@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Sergey Konoplev <gray(dot)ru(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 9:31 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Say what? There's never been any hugepages support in Postgres.
> There were an ability to back shared memory with hugepages when using
> <=9.2. I use it on ~30 servers for several years and it brings 8-17%
> of performance depending on the memory size. Here you will find
> several paragraphs of the description about how to do it
> https://github.com/grayhemp/pgcookbook/blob/master/database_server_configuration.md.
What this describes is how to modify Postgres to request huge pages.
That's hardly built-in support.
In any case, as David already explained, we don't do feature additions
in minor releases. We'd be especially unlikely to make an exception
for this, since it has uncertain portability and benefits. Anything
that carries portability risks has got to go through a beta testing
cycle before we'll unleash it on the masses.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2013-10-30 15:53:08 | Re: Fast insertion indexes: why no developments |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-10-30 15:04:36 | Re: [PATCH] Use MAP_HUGETLB where supported (v3) |