| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance |
| Date: | 2010-04-16 08:29:54 |
| Message-ID: | 4BC82002.3010307@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 21:09 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> A quick fix would be to check if there's any entries in the hash table
>> before scanning it. That would eliminate the overhead when there's no
>> in-progress transactions in the master. But as soon as there's even one,
>> the overhead comes back.
>
> Any fix should be fairly quick because of the way its modularised - with
> something like this in mind.
>
> I'll try a circular buffer implementation, with fastpath.
I started experimenting with a sorted array based implementation on
Tuesday but got carried away with other stuff. I now got back to that
and cleaned it up.
How does the attached patch look like? It's probably similar to what you
had in mind.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| knownassignedxids-array-2.patch | text/x-diff | 14.6 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-04-16 09:00:30 | Re: Remaining Streaming Replication Open Items |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-04-16 07:37:55 | Re: pgindent and tabs in comments |