Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> >> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >>> So are you stopping work on the patch? I assume so.
> >> Yes, at least for now. I can't believe the patch actually hurts
> >> performance, but I'm not going to spend time investigating it.
> > Are we withdrawing the patch from consideration for 8.3 then?
> > I had assumed it was still a live candidate, but if it seems to
> > lose in pgbench maybe we had better set it aside.
> I haven't tried pgbench, the tests I ran were with DBT-2.
> Just to summarize again: the patch did help to keep the stock table
> smaller, but the response times were higher with the patch.
> Maybe we should keep this issue open until we resolve the vacuum WAL
> flush issue? I can then rerun the same tests to see if this patch is a
> win after that.
Would you like to add a TODO item?
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2007-03-27 17:19:25|
|Subject: Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum |
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2007-03-27 17:10:05|
|Subject: Re: Recalculating OldestXmin in a long-running vacuum|