Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData()

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData()
Date: 2016-03-16 17:33:26
Message-ID: 20160316173326.3pqdrfgr56jri4ej@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-03-16 13:29:22 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Whoa. At 64 clients, we're hardly getting any benefit, but then by 88
> clients, we're getting a huge benefit. I wonder why there's that sharp
> change there.

What's the specifics of the machine tested? I wonder if it either
correlates with the number of hardware threads, real cores, or cache
sizes.

- Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-03-16 17:42:26 Re: Choosing parallel_degree
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-03-16 17:29:22 Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData()