| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gavin Flower <gavinflower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] In progress INSERT wrecks plans on table |
| Date: | 2013-07-08 17:11:36 |
| Message-ID: | 51DAF2C8.6010705@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On 06/23/2013 09:43 PM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
> (Cc: to pgsql-performance dropped, pgsql-hackers added.)
>
> At 2013-05-06 09:14:01 +0100, simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com wrote:
>>
>> New version of patch attached which fixes a few bugs.
>
> I read the patch, but only skimmed the earlier discussion about it. In
> isolation, I can say that the patch applies cleanly and looks sensible
> for what it does (i.e., cache pgprocno to speed up repeated calls to
> TransactionIdIsInProgress(somexid)).
>
> In that sense, it's ready for committer, but I don't know if there's a
> better/more complete/etc. way to address the original problem.
Has this patch had performance testing? Because of the list crossover I
don't have any information on that.
--
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Cédric Villemain | 2013-07-08 17:13:38 | Re: Millisecond-precision connect_timeout for libpq |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2013-07-08 17:10:32 | [9.4 CF 1] Week 3 report |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2013-07-08 22:21:30 | Re: Performance autovaccum |
| Previous Message | Jeison Bedoya | 2013-07-08 17:01:45 | Re: Process in state BIND, authentication, PARSE |