From: | Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | johnlumby <johnlumby(at)hotmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Extended Prefetching using Asynchronous IO - proposal and patch |
Date: | 2014-06-01 05:27:11 |
Message-ID: | CAGTBQpY0jCuMgXudn5_e=9o3OHezk3vzx_VhmSEnpUYiwOvsZg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 9:44 PM, johnlumby <johnlumby(at)hotmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'll try to do some measuring of performance with:
> a) git head
> b) git head + patch as-is
> c) git head + patch without aio_suspend in foreign processes (just re-read)
> d) git head + patch with a lwlock (or whatever works) instead of aio_suspend
>
> a-c will be the fastest, d might take some while.
>
> I'll let you know of the results as I get them.
>
>
> Claudio, I am not quite sure if what I am submitting now is
> quite the same as any of yours. As I promised before, but have
> not yet done, I will package one or two of my benchmarks and
> send them in.
It's a tad different. c will not do polling on the foreign process, I
will just let PG do the read again. d will be like polling, but
without the associated CPU overhead.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Wall | 2014-06-01 06:41:02 | Upgrading from PG 8.3.3 to 9.3.4 - FATAL: invalid value for parameter "TimeZone": "PST" |
Previous Message | johnlumby | 2014-06-01 01:03:47 | Re: Extended Prefetching using Asynchronous IO - proposal and patch |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim Nasby | 2014-06-01 05:50:58 | Re: Changeset Extraction v7.6.1 |
Previous Message | johnlumby | 2014-06-01 01:03:47 | Re: Extended Prefetching using Asynchronous IO - proposal and patch |