| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem |
| Date: | 2002-01-05 01:44:17 |
| Message-ID: | 8865.1010195057@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-odbc |
Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> BTW, could you run the test with changing the number of CPUs?
I'm not sure how to do that (and I don't have root on that machine,
so probably couldn't do it myself anyway). Maybe I can arrange
something with the admins next week.
BTW, I am currently getting some interesting results from adjusting
SPINS_PER_DELAY in s_lock.c. Will post results when I finish the
set of test runs.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gavin Sherry | 2002-01-05 01:59:32 | Re: [HACKERS] Updated TODO item |
| Previous Message | Gavin Sherry | 2002-01-05 01:32:29 | Re: Undocumented feature costs a lot of performance in COPY |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2002-01-05 17:54:29 | Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2002-01-05 01:25:32 | Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem |