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

Re: CommitDelay performance improvement

From: ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers)
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: CommitDelay performance improvement
Date: 2001-02-23 21:21:33
Message-ID: 20010223132133.P624@store.zembu.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 11:32:21AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> A further refinement, still quite cheap to implement since the info is
> in the PROC struct, would be to not count backends that are blocked
> waiting for locks.  These guys are less likely to be ready to commit
> in the next few milliseconds than the guys who are actively running;
> indeed they cannot commit until someone else has committed/aborted to
> release the lock they need.
> 
> Comments?  What should the threshold N be ... or do we need to make
> that a tunable parameter?

Once you make it tuneable, you're stuck with it.  You can always add
a knob later, after somebody discovers a real need.

Nathan Myers
ncm(at)zembu(dot)com

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2001-02-23 21:24:56
Subject: Re: beta5 packages ...
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-02-23 21:17:08
Subject: Re: beta5 packages ...

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