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.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2010-04-16 09:00:30|
|Subject: Re: Remaining Streaming Replication Open Items|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2010-04-16 07:37:55|
|Subject: Re: pgindent and tabs in comments|