Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
Date: 2017-03-10 06:21:28
Message-ID: 22895.1489126888@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Just to let you know that I think I have figured out the reason of
> failure. If we run the regressions with attached patch, it will make
> the regression tests fail consistently in same way. The patch just
> makes all transaction status updates to go via group clog update
> mechanism.

This does *not* give me a warm fuzzy feeling that this patch was
ready to commit. Or even that it was tested to the claimed degree.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Nasby 2017-03-10 06:58:56 Re: Report the number of skipped frozen pages by manual VACUUM
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2017-03-10 06:13:40 Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers