Re: _mdfd_getseg can be expensive

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: _mdfd_getseg can be expensive
Date: 2016-08-19 00:35:47
Message-ID: CAM3SWZQGT64wYVOm1jWvFY21JV8bRMTvP0BKLsjUTwvS63GMhg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>> I can review this next week.
>
> Thanks

Given the time frame that you have in mind, I won't revisit the
question the parallel CLUSTER CPU bottleneck issue until this is
committed. The patch might change things enough that that would be a
waste of time.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-08-19 00:42:32 Re: _mdfd_getseg can be expensive
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2016-08-19 00:35:34 Re: amcheck (B-Tree integrity checking tool)