| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT? |
| Date: | 2016-08-20 18:38:52 |
| Message-ID: | 29160.1471718332@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Wow, nice results. My intuition on why PGXACT helped in the first place was that it minimized the number of cache lines that had to be touched to take a snapshot. Padding obviously would somewhat increase that again, so I can't quite understand why it seems to be helping... any idea?
That's an interesting point. I wonder whether this whole thing will be
useless or even counterproductive after (if) Heikki's CSN-snapshot patch
gets in. I would certainly not mind reverting the PGXACT/PGPROC
separation if it proves no longer helpful after that.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-08-20 19:05:30 | pgsql: Make initdb's suggested "pg_ctl start" command line more reliabl |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-08-20 18:33:13 | Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT? |