From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
Date: | 2015-11-17 08:06:47 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1+9AcXMBAnWi5ntVwmQfd3pR4m7UMJtoEd1Lb6zPemgHQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 6:34 AM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:49 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> > > Increasing CLOG buffers to 64 helps in reducing the contention due to
second
> > > reason. Experiments revealed that increasing CLOG buffers only helps
> > > once the contention around ProcArrayLock is reduced.
> >
>
> Overall this idea sounds promising, but I think the work involved is more
> than the benefit I am expecting for the current optimization we are
> discussing.
>
Sorry, I think last line is slightly confusing, let me try to again write
it:
Overall this idea sounds promising, but I think the work involved is more
than the benefit expected from the current optimization we are
discussing.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vitaly Burovoy | 2015-11-17 08:09:18 | Re: Extracting fields from 'infinity'::TIMESTAMP[TZ] |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-11-17 08:02:29 | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |