| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics |
| Date: | 2016-04-05 15:55:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1JAzLGEWVF0NO7SOTpeB1YTFxnjE-VZ7cCizHRzF=DqTA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 9:00 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> On 2016-04-05 20:56:31 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > This fluctuation started appearing after commit 6150a1b0 which we have
> > discussed in another thread [1] and a colleague of mine is working on to
> > write a patch to try to revert it on current HEAD and then see the
results.
>
> I don't see what that buys us. That commit is a good win on x86...
>
At least, that way we can see the results of pin-unpin without
fluctuation. I agree that we need to narrow down why even after reducing
BufferDesc size, we are seeing performance fluctuation.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-04-05 15:57:59 | Re: Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups |
| Previous Message | Petr Jelinek | 2016-04-05 15:52:46 | Re: Sequence Access Method WIP |