| From: | "Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Imai, Yoshikazu" <imai(dot)yoshikazu(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Cc: | 'Amit Langote' <Langote_Amit_f8(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: speeding up planning with partitions |
| Date: | 2019-02-08 08:47:46 |
| Message-ID: | 0F97FA9ABBDBE54F91744A9B37151A512787EC@g01jpexmbkw24 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 1:34 AM, I wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 2:04 AM, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> > Can you compare the performance of auto and force_custom_plan again
> > with the attached patch? It uses PGPROC's LOCALLOCK list instead of
> > the hash table.
>
> Thanks for the patch, but it seems to have some problems.
I just missed compiling.
Performance degradation I saw before is improved! The results are below.
[v20 + faster-locallock-scan.patch]
auto: 9,069 TPS
custom: 9,015 TPS
[v20]
auto: 8,037 TPS
custom: 8,933 TPS
As David and I mentioned this patch should be discussed on another thread, so Tsunakawa-san, could you launch the another thread please?
Thanks
--
Yoshikazu Imai
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rushabh Lathia | 2019-02-08 09:05:03 | Re: ON SELECT rule on a table without columns |
| Previous Message | Tsunakawa, Takayuki | 2019-02-08 08:40:00 | RE: Commit Fest 2019-01 is now closed |