From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |
Date: | 2019-09-26 19:36:20 |
Message-ID: | 20190926193620.GA16836@alvherre.pgsql |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Sep-26, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> How certain are you about the approach to measure memory used by a
> reorderbuffer transaction ... does it not cause a measurable performance
> drop? I wonder if it would make more sense to use a separate contexts
> per transaction and use context-level accounting (per the patch Jeff
> Davis posted elsewhere for hash joins ... though I see now that that
> only works fot aset.c, not other memcxt implementations), or something
> like that.
Oh, I just noticed that that patch was posted separately in its own
thread, and that that improved version does include support for other
memory context implementations. Excellent.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-09-26 19:48:28 | Re: Online checksums patch - once again |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-09-26 19:33:59 | Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions |