Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction
Date: 2014-09-09 10:24:47
Message-ID: CAA4eK1KwCmWVjBKD2EWkTqqUDc7CRkAF=tfKD1nL_=SZr1EcNw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 3:11 AM, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
> On 5 September 2014 14:19, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>> >
>> > Apart from above, I think for this patch, cat version bump is required
>> > as I have modified system catalog. However I have not done the
>> > same in patch as otherwise it will be bit difficult to take performance
>> > data.
>>
>> One regression failed on linux due to spacing issue which is
>> fixed in attached patch.
>
>
> Here's a set of test results against this patch:

Many thanks for taking the performance data. This data clearly shows
that there is a performance improvement at even lower configuration,
however the real benefit of the patch can be seen with higher core
m/c and with larger RAM (can contain all the data).

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2014-09-09 10:31:04 Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised.
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2014-09-09 10:00:23 Re: pg_background (and more parallelism infrastructure patches)