Re: Improve lseek scalability v3

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl(at)kvack(dot)org>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew(at)wil(dot)cx>, Andi Kleen <andi(at)firstfloor(dot)org>, viro(at)zeniv(dot)linux(dot)org(dot)uk, linux-fsdevel(at)vger(dot)kernel(dot)org, linux-kernel(at)vger(dot)kernel(dot)org, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com
Subject: Re: Improve lseek scalability v3
Date: 2011-09-16 21:05:18
Message-ID: 201109162305.18696.andres@anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Friday, September 16, 2011 11:02:38 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Also with fstat() instead of lseek() there was no bottleneck anymore, so I
> don't think the benefits would warrant that.
At least thats what I observed on a 4 x 6 machine without the patch applied
(can't reboot it). That shouldn't be concurrency relevant so...

Andres

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2011-09-16 22:44:59 Re: Improve lseek scalability v3
Previous Message Andres Freund 2011-09-16 21:02:38 Re: Improve lseek scalability v3