Re: [PERFORM] Cpu usage 100% on slave. s_lock problem.

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Дмитрий Дегтярёв <degtyaryov(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PERFORM] Cpu usage 100% on slave. s_lock problem.
Date: 2013-09-27 20:41:02
Message-ID: CAM3SWZQA8CNBLn6zDTB+P13=EWbcWe1hF1NP7NHbutjwmia6zg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Heikki Linnakangas
<hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> wrote:
> Yep. I only added the first caller of the barriers altogether in the
> xlog-insertion scaling patch. Robert wrote the infrastructure in 9.3, but it
> wasn't used until now, in 9.4.

FWIW, it was actually during 9.2 development that Robert first added
the barriers.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Singer 2013-09-27 21:06:59 Re: logical changeset generation v6
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2013-09-27 20:28:37 Re: [PERFORM] Cpu usage 100% on slave. s_lock problem.