| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Zhihong Yu <zyu(at)yugabyte(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: subtransaction performance |
| Date: | 2022-10-10 18:20:37 |
| Message-ID: | Y0RidV1vYrgwx8cH@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 7, 2022 at 03:23:27PM -0700, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> Hi,
> I stumbled over:
>
> https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/09/29/
> why-we-spent-the-last-month-eliminating-postgresql-subtransactions/
>
> I wonder if SAVEPOINT / subtransaction performance has been boosted since the
> blog was written.
No, I have not seen any changes in this area since then. Seems there
are two problems --- the 64 cache per session and the 64k on the
replica. In both cases, it seems sizing is not optimal, but sizing is
never optimal. I guess we can look at allowing manual size adjustment,
automatic size adjustment, or a different approach that is more graceful
for larger savepoint workloads.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2022-10-10 18:30:35 | Re: list of acknowledgments for PG15 |
| Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2022-10-10 18:17:47 | Re: [patch] \g with multiple result sets and \watch with copy queries |