Re: Keep elog(ERROR) and ereport(ERROR) calls in the cold path

On 2020-09-29 11:26, David Rowley wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 08:42, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 19:08, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I ran another scale=5 TPCH benchmark on v4 against f859c2ffa using gcc
>>> 9.3. I'm unable to see any gains with this, however, the results were
>>> pretty noisy. I only ran pgbench for 60 seconds per query. I'll likely
>>> need to run that a bit longer. I'll do that tonight.
>>
>> I've attached the results of a TPCH scale=5 run master (f859c2ffa) vs
>> master + elog_ereport_attribute_cold_v4.patch
>>
>> It does not look great. The patched version seems to have done about
>> 1.17% less work than master did.
>
> I've marked this patch back as waiting for review. It would be good if
> someone could run some tests on some intel hardware and see if they
> can see any speedup.

What is the way forward here? What exactly would you like to have tested?

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services