| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: sinval synchronization considered harmful |
| Date: | 2011-07-26 19:25:05 |
| Message-ID: | 15009.1311708305@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>> Signals are already in use for special cases (queue is full), and I
>> think going through the kernel to achieve much more will lower
>> performance significantly.
> If there are no invalidations, there would be no signals. How would
> zero signals decrease performance?
But if there *is* an invalidation (which is not a negligible case),
it'd get significantly slower.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Yeb Havinga | 2011-07-26 19:32:11 | Pull up aggregate sublink (was: Parameterized aggregate subquery (was: Pull up aggregate subquery)) |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-07-26 19:25:04 | Re: sinval synchronization considered harmful |