Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Jignesh K(dot) Shah" <J(dot)K(dot)Shah(at)Sun(dot)COM>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Subject: Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look?
Date: 2007-07-23 18:19:20
Message-ID: 1545.1185214760@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> currPos and markPos are defined as BTScanPosData, which is an array of
> BTScanPosItems. That makes BTScanOpaqueData up to 8232 bytes, which
> seems wasteful since markPos is only ever used during merge joins. Most
> of that space isn't even used during merge joins either, we just do that
> to slightly optimise the speed of the restore during merge joins.

Ah.  I was seeing it as 6600 bytes on HPPA and 6608 on x86_64, but
I forgot that both of those architectures have MAXALIGN = 8.  On a
MAXALIGN = 4 machine, MaxIndexTuplesPerPage will be significantly
larger, leading to larger BTScanPosData.

Not sure it's worth fooling with, given that these days almost everyone
who's seriously concerned about performance is probably using 64bit
hardware.  One less malloc cycle per indexscan is never going to be a
measurable savings anyway...

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2007-07-23 18:30:48
Subject: Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look?
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2007-07-23 17:50:53
Subject: Re: User concurrency thresholding: where do I look?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group