Re: Rethinking MemoryContext creation

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Rethinking MemoryContext creation
Date: 2017-12-11 18:09:42
Message-ID: 18351.1513015782@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 12/10/2017 04:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> writes:
>>> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 5:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>>> Overall I'm seeing about a 5% improvement in a "pgbench -S" scenario,
>>>> although that number is a bit shaky since the run-to-run variation
>>>> is a few percent anyway.

> FWIW I've done some measurements, and while there is a improvement, it's
> far from 5%. ...
> So that's about 1.3% and 1.2% improvement. It seems fairly consistent,
> but it might easily be due to different in layout of the binaries.

Thanks for checking. With these sorts of small-percentage improvements,
I would not be surprised for platform-to-platform results to be different.
At least you do see some improvement too.

Let me code up the change to avoid copying constant name strings,
and then we can see if that helps any.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2017-12-11 18:17:14 Re: Rethinking MemoryContext creation
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2017-12-11 18:06:14 Re: [HACKERS] Custom compression methods