From: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Staale Smedseng" <Staale(dot)Smedseng(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
Cc: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Why are we waiting? |
Date: | 2008-02-06 14:56:16 |
Message-ID: | 87ir12uoa7.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Staale Smedseng" <Staale(dot)Smedseng(at)Sun(dot)COM> writes:
> The stack trace shows that the only time the lock is acquired
> exclusively is from the call to ProcArrayEndTransaction() in
> CommitTransaction().
I'm not sure but I think that's only true in 8.3. As I understood it in 8.2
transaction start also needed the exclusive lock.
> Also, an interesting observation is that the hot locks seem to have
> changed from v8.2 to v8.3, making the ProcArrayLock more contended. See
> the following outputs:
>
> PostgreSQL 8.2 (32-bit):
>...
> PostgreSQL 8.3 (64-bit):
>...
I'm not sure 32-bit and 64-bit cases are going to be directly comparable. We
could have a problem with cache line aliasing on only one or the other for
example.
But that is a pretty striking difference. Does the 8.3 run complete more
transactions in that time?
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
Ask me about EnterpriseDB's 24x7 Postgres support!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-02-06 15:13:24 | pg_dump additional options for performance |
Previous Message | Dave Page | 2008-02-06 14:49:24 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan |