From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
Date: | 2017-07-04 04:33:38 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1KudxzgWhuywY_X=yeSAhJMT4DwCjroV5Ay60xaeB2Eew@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Conclusion:
>> As seen from the test results mentioned above, there is some performance
>> improvement with 3 SP(s), with 5 SP(s) the results with patch is slightly
>> better than HEAD, with 7 and 10 SP(s) we do see regression with patch.
>> Therefore, I think the threshold value of 4 for number of subtransactions
>> considered in the patch looks fine to me.
>>
>
> Thanks for the tests. Attached find the rebased patch on HEAD. I have ran
> latest pgindent on patch. I have yet to add wait event for group lock waits
> in this patch as is done by Robert in commit
> d4116a771925379c33cf4c6634ca620ed08b551d for ProcArrayGroupUpdate.
>
I have updated the patch to support wait events and moved it to upcoming CF.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
group_update_clog_v13.patch | application/octet-stream | 16.3 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2017-07-04 04:34:46 | Re: Race conditions with WAL sender PID lookups |
Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-07-04 04:32:00 | Re: Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively) partitioned tables |