From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Gather performance analysis |
Date: | 2021-09-08 06:33:47 |
Message-ID: | 20210908063347.iqqwzjh6eve4zstp@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-09-08 11:45:16 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 3:08 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
>
> > Looking at this profile made me wonder if this was a build without
> > optimizations. The pg_atomic_read_u64()/pg_atomic_read_u64_impl() calls
> > should
> > be inlined. And while perf can reconstruct inlined functions when using
> > --call-graph=dwarf, they show up like "pg_atomic_read_u64 (inlined)" for
> > me.
> >
>
> Yeah, for profiling generally I build without optimizations so that I can
> see all the functions in the stack, so yeah profile results are without
> optimizations build but the performance results are with optimizations
> build.
I'm afraid that makes the profiles just about meaningless :(.
> Is this with or without patch, I mean can we see a comparison that patch
> improved anything in your environment?
It was without any patches. I'll try the patch in a bit.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-09-08 06:34:51 | Re: Rewriting the test of pg_upgrade as a TAP test - take three - remastered set |
Previous Message | Dilip Kumar | 2021-09-08 06:28:17 | Re: [BUG]Update Toast data failure in logical replication |