| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: INSERT...ON DUPLICATE KEY LOCK FOR UPDATE |
| Date: | 2014-01-02 23:56:22 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZQ2F0DhT4ThLqKw8_oVFcaUYqAgLDrXQz8+TSw0gdhq6A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> My executive summary is that the exclusion patch performs about the
> same on lower client counts, presumably due to not having the
> additional window of btree lock contention. By 8 clients, the
> exclusion patch does noticeably better, but it's a fairly modest
> improvement.
I forgot to mention that synchronous_commit was turned off, so as to
eliminate noise that might have been added by commit latency, while
still obligating btree to WAL log everything with an exclusive buffer
lock held.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-01-03 00:16:55 | Re: [PATCH] Store Extension Options |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2014-01-02 23:54:26 | Re: fix_PGSTAT_NUM_TABENTRIES_macro patch |