From: | "Joel Jacobson" <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Thomas Munro" <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "Rishu Bagga" <rishu(dot)postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Optimize LISTEN/NOTIFY |
Date: | 2025-09-24 20:34:49 |
Message-ID: | 0dc6a2cc-5216-4dc1-9dd2-430cafc6095b@app.fastmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Sep 23, 2025, at 18:27, Tom Lane wrote:
> I concur that these are orthogonal issues, but I don't understand
> why you withdrew your patches --- don't they constitute a solution
> to the first scalability bottleneck?
Thanks for getting back to this thread. I was unhappy with not finding a
solution that would improve all use-cases, I had a feeling it would be
possible to find one, and I think I've done so now.
>> I guess my main question is if we think we should fix one problem first,
>> then the other, both at the same time, or only one or the other?
>
> I imagine we'd eventually want to fix both, but it doesn't have to
> be done in the same patch.
I've attached a new patch with a new pragmatic approach, that
specifically addresses the context switching cost.
The patch is based upon the assumption that some extra LISTEN/NOTIFY
latency would be acceptable by most users, as a trade-off, in order to
improve throughput.
One nice thing with this approach is that it has the potential to
improve throughput both for users with just a single listening backend,
and also for users with lots of listening backends.
More details in the commit message of the patch.
Curious to hear thoughts on this approach.
/Joel
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-LISTEN-NOTIFY-make-the-latency-throughput-trade-off-.patch | application/octet-stream | 11.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Corey Huinker | 2025-09-24 20:36:45 | Re: thoughts on v18 RMT |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2025-09-24 20:13:43 | Re: eliminate xl_heap_visible to reduce WAL (and eventually set VM on-access) |