RE: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations are accessed in a transaction

From: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Peter Eisentraut' <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "'Simon Riggs'" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations are accessed in a transaction
Date: 2019-03-19 07:53:27
Message-ID: 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1FBDFA00@G01JPEXMBYT05
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi Peter, Imai-san,

From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com]
> Your changes in LOCALLOCK still refer to PGPROC, from your first version
> of the patch.
>
> I think the reordering of struct members could be done as a separate
> preliminary patch.
>
> Some more documentation in the comment before dlist_head LocalLocks to
> explain this whole mechanism would be nice.

Fixed.

> You posted a link to some performance numbers, but I didn't see the test
> setup explained there. I'd like to get some more information on this
> impact of this. Is there an effect with 100 tables, or do you need 100000?

Imai-san, can you tell us the test setup?

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-reorder-LOCALLOCK-structure-members-to-compact-the-s.patch application/octet-stream 1.4 KB
0002-speed-up-LOCALLOCK-scan.patch application/octet-stream 6.6 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2019-03-19 07:59:32 Re: [HACKERS] Block level parallel vacuum
Previous Message Haribabu Kommi 2019-03-19 07:51:15 Re: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VS query mean time