Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SLRU optimization - configurable buffer pool and partitioning the SLRU lock
Date: 2023-10-25 12:28:09
Message-ID: CAA4eK1K23TAPTxQk2AYL6PFqWE3XknaC3RxC=_YT53RjLZKJFA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 9:40 AM Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 9:43 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > This and other results shared by you look promising. Will there be any
> > improvement in workloads related to clog buffer usage?
>
> I did not understand this question can you explain this a bit?
>

I meant to ask about the impact of this patch on accessing transaction
status via TransactionIdGetStatus(). Shouldn't we expect some
improvement in accessing CLOG buffers?

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jelte Fennema 2023-10-25 12:35:45 Re: Add new for_each macros for iterating over a List that do not require ListCell pointer
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2023-10-25 12:12:53 Re: [BUG] Fix DETACH with FK pointing to a partitioned table fails