| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Ivan Voras <ivoras(at)freebsd(dot)org>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance |
| Date: | 2010-10-07 20:31:36 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTikKaNhHHimcO1XPdwvTCa-HYH4UJAGwgHjTKaQM@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> perhaps it would be possible by, say, increasing the number of
>> lock partitions by 8x. It would be nice to segregate these issues
>> though, because using pread/pwrite is probably a lot less work
>> than rewriting our lock manager.
>
> You mean easier than changing this 4 to a 7?:
>
> #define LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS 4
>
> Or am I missing something?
Right. They did something more complicated (and, I think, better)
than that, but that change by itself might be enough to ameliorate the
lock contention enough to see the lsek() issue.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Stark | 2010-10-07 20:56:14 | Re: standby registration (was: is sync rep stalled?) |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2010-10-07 19:50:32 | Timeout and Synch Rep |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-10-07 20:40:13 | Re: Odd behaviour with redundant CREATE statement |
| Previous Message | Aaron Turner | 2010-10-07 20:03:47 | Re: large dataset with write vs read clients |