Re: Extended Prefetching using Asynchronous IO - proposal and patch

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.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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