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

Re: futex results with dbt-3

From: Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Subject: Re: futex results with dbt-3
Date: 2004-10-23 10:51:39
Message-ID: 417A37BB.9050305@bigfoot.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Josh Berkus wrote:
 > Tom,
 >
 >
 >>The bigger problem here is that the SMP locking bottlenecks we are
 >>currently seeing are *hardware* issues (AFAICT anyway).  The only way
 >>that futexes can offer a performance win is if they have a smarter way
 >>of executing the basic atomic-test-and-set sequence than we do;
 >>and if so, we could read their code and adopt that method without having
 >>to buy into any large reorganization of our code.
 >
 >
 > Well, initial results from Gavin/Neil's patch seem to indicate that, while
 > futexes do not cure the CSStorm bug, they do lessen its effects in terms of
 > real performance loss.

I proposed weeks ago to see how the CSStorm is affected by stick each backend
in one processor ( where the process was born ) using the cpu-affinity capability
( kernel 2.6 ), is this proposal completely out of mind ?


Regards
Gaetano Mendola








In response to

Responses

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: Steinar H. GundersonDate: 2004-10-23 11:15:30
Subject: Re: Insert performance, what should I expect?
Previous:From: Gaetano MendolaDate: 2004-10-23 10:31:32
Subject: Re: Insert performance, what should I expect?

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