| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <Robert(dot)Creager(at)Sun(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seeing context switch storm with 10/13 snapshot |
| Date: | 2005-10-21 14:23:20 |
| Message-ID: | 4358B39A020000250000018A@gwmta.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Remember the suggestion I made that PostgreSQL add the capability
to define named caches and bind specific objects to those caches?
One of the reasons Sybase recommends using such named caches
(per their performance tuning documentation) is to reduce spinlock
contention.
I don't know whether PostgreSQL would get a similar benefit, but
this discussion rang a bell, so I thought I should throw it out there
on the chance that it might be useful.
-Kevin
>>> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> >>>
The problem right now is not lack of ability to reproduce the
problem, it is lack of ideas how to fix it.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Martijn van Oosterhout | 2005-10-21 14:31:10 | Which platforms don't HAVE_POSIX_SIGNALS? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-10-21 13:59:40 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Clean up some obsolete statements about GiST |