| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | AJG <ayden(at)gera(dot)co(dot)nz> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Pluggable storage |
| Date: | 2018-06-18 20:14:31 |
| Message-ID: | 20180618201431.xxyte63l7d4rupsj@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2018-06-18 12:43:57 -0700, AJG wrote:
> @Amit
>
> Re: Vacuum etc.
>
> Chrome V8 just released this blog post around concurrent marking, which may
> be of interest considering how cpu limited the browser is. Contains
> benchmark numbers etc in post as well.
>
> https://v8project.blogspot.com/2018/06/concurrent-marking.html
>
> "This post describes the garbage collection technique called concurrent
> marking. The optimization allows a JavaScript application to continue
> execution while the garbage collector scans the heap to find and mark live
> objects. Our benchmarks show that concurrent marking reduces the time spent
> marking on the main thread by 60%–70%"
I don't see how in-memory GC techniques have much bearing on the
discussion here?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2018-06-18 20:20:07 | Re: Index Skip Scan |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2018-06-18 19:59:22 | Re: [WIP] [B-Tree] Retail IndexTuple deletion |