Re: CommitDelay performance improvement

> 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.

I wonder if Tom should implement it, but leave it at zero until people
can report that a non-zero helps. We already have the parameter, we can
just make it smarter and let people test it.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026