Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: profiling connection overhead

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: profiling connection overhead
Date: 2010-11-24 18:06:58
Message-ID: 29281.1290622018@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> OK, patch attached.

Two comments:

1. A comment would help, something like "Assert we released all buffer pins".

2. AtProcExit_LocalBuffers should be redone the same way, for
consistency (it likely won't make any performance difference).
Note the comment for AtProcExit_LocalBuffers, too; that probably
needs to be changed along the lines of "If we missed any, and
assertions aren't enabled, we'll fail later in DropRelFileNodeBuffers
while trying to drop the temp rels".

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-11-24 18:07:03
Subject: Re: final patch - plpgsql: for-in-array
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-11-24 18:01:32
Subject: Re: profiling connection overhead

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group