| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
| Date: | 2016-09-19 19:12:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20160919191247.srwhnbpryhsbi3me@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-09-19 15:10:58 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Personally, I find the results so far posted on this thread thoroughly
> unimpressive. I acknowledge that Dilip's results appear to show that
> in a best-case scenario these patches produce a rather large gain.
> However, that gain seems to happen in a completely contrived scenario:
> astronomical client counts, unlogged tables, and a test script that
> maximizes pressure on CLogControlLock. If you have to work that hard
> to find a big win, and tests under more reasonable conditions show no
> benefit, it's not clear to me that it's really worth the time we're
> all spending benchmarking and reviewing this, or the risk of bugs, or
> the damage to the SLRU abstraction layer. I think there's a very good
> chance that we're better off moving on to projects that have a better
> chance of helping in the real world.
+1
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2016-09-19 19:16:19 | Re: Fix for PL/Python slow input arrays traversal issue |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-09-19 19:10:58 | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |