| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Storing hot members of PGPROC out of the band |
| Date: | 2011-12-17 01:25:51 |
| Message-ID: | 201112170125.pBH1PpC07675@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote:
> On that theory, I'm inclined to think that's not really a problem.
> We'll go nuts if we refuse to commit anything until it shows a
> meaningful win on every imaginable workload, and it seems like this
> can't really be worse than the status quo; any case where it is must
> be some kind of artifact. We're better of getting rid of as much
> ProcArrayLock contention as possible, rather than keeping it around
> because there are corner cases where it decreases contention on some
> other lock.
Interesting conclusion, and it makes sense. Seems once this is applied
we will have more places to look for contention improvements.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-12-17 02:26:31 | Re: JSON for PG 9.2 |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2011-12-16 23:44:46 | Re: JSON for PG 9.2 |