Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:

> On 2016-03-27 12:38:25 +0300, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 1:26 AM, Alexander Korotkov <
> > a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you very much for testing!
> > > I also got access to 4 x 18 Intel server with 144 threads. I'm going to
> > > post results of tests on this server in next Monday.
> > >
> >
> > I've run pgbench tests on this machine: pgbench -s 1000 -c $clients -j
> 100
> > -M prepared -T 300.
> > See results in the table and chart.
> >
> > clients master v3 v5
> > 1 11671 12507 12679
> > 2 24650 26005 25010
> > 4 49631 48863 49811
> > 8 96790 96441 99946
> > 10 121275 119928 124100
> > 20 243066 243365 246432
> > 30 359616 342241 357310
> > 40 431375 415310 441619
> > 50 489991 489896 500590
> > 60 538057 636473 554069
> > 70 588659 714426 738535
> > 80 405008 923039 902632
> > 90 295443 1181247 1155918
> > 100 258695 1323125 1325019
> > 110 238842 1393767 1410274
> > 120 226018 1432504 1474982
> > 130 215102 1465459 1503241
> > 140 206415 1470454 1505380
> > 150 197850 1475479 1519908
> > 160 190935 1420915 1484868
> > 170 185835 1438965 1453128
> > 180 182519 1416252 1453098
> >
> > My conclusions are following:
> > 1) We don't observe any regression in v5 in comparison to master.
> > 2) v5 in most of cases slightly outperforms v3.
>
> What commit did you base these tests on? I guess something recent, after
> 98a64d0bd?
>

Yes, more recent than 98a64d0bd. It was based on 676265eb7b.

> > I'm going to do some code cleanup of v5 in Monday
>
> Ok, I'll try to do a review and possibly commit after that.
>

Sounds good.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company