| From: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | "hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com" <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reduce pinning in btree indexes |
| Date: | 2015-03-01 14:08:29 |
| Message-ID: | 182394017.537297.1425218909559.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> Hello, I measured the performance of this patch considering
> markpos/restorepos. The loss seems to be up to about 10%
> unfortunately.
Thanks for the test case!
I took another look at this optimization, and found that it didn't
really depend on the pin (as I had first thought), so I put it back
(keeping the rest of the patch unchanged). I saw a 1.4% increase
in run time with the patch (compared to master) for the mark-only
test, and a 1.6% increase in run time for the mark/restore test.
I'll look into what might be causing that. I have seen bigger
differences just due to changing where executable code crossed
cache boundaries, but this is big enough to worry about; it needs
to be checked.
New patch attached.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| bt-nopin-v2.patch | invalid/octet-stream | 26.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-03-01 14:36:59 | Re: Additional role attributes && superuser review |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-03-01 13:11:13 | Re: Bug in pg_dump |