Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?
Date: 2017-02-21 11:37:05
Message-ID: 20170221113705.ud2wgee36yclewoc@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2017-02-21 16:57:36 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote:
> Yes, there is still some regression however it has come down by a
> small margin. I am not doing initdb for each run instead I am doing,
> dropdb-->createdb-->pgbench -i. Is dropping old database and creating
> a new one for every run not okay, Do I have to do initdb every time.
> Okay, I can change the order of reading and let you know the results.

That does make a difference. Primarily because WAL writes in a new
cluster are a more expensive than in an old one, because of segment
recycling.

- Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2017-02-21 12:12:45 Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
Previous Message Ashutosh Sharma 2017-02-21 11:27:36 Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?