From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Gould <daveg(at)sonic(dot)net> |
Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Spin Lock sleep resolution |
Date: | 2013-06-18 07:09:55 |
Message-ID: | 51C007C3.1030804@vmware.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi David,
On 02.04.2013 22:58, David Gould wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2013 09:01:36 -0700
> Jeff Janes<jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry. I triple checked that the patch was there, but it seems like if you
>> save a draft with an attachment, when you come back later to finish and
>> send it, the attachment may not be there anymore. The Gmail Offline teams
>> still has a ways to go. Hopefully it is actually there this time.
>
> I'll give the patch a try, I have a workload that is impacted by spinlocks
> fairly heavily sometimes and this might help or at least give me more
> information. Thanks!
Did you ever get around to test this?
I repeated these pgbench tests I did earlier:
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/5190E17B.9060804@vmware.com
I concluded in that thread that on this platform, the TAS_SPIN macro
really needs a non-locked test before the locked one. That fixes the big
fall in performance with more than 28 clients. So I repeated that test
with four versions:
master - no patch
spin-delay-ms - Jeff's patch
nonlocked-test - master with the non-locked test added to TAS_SPIN
spin-delay-ms-nonlocked-test - both patches
Jeff's patch seems to somewhat alleviate the huge fall in performance
I'm otherwise seeing without the nonlocked-test patch. With the
nonlocked-test patch, if you squint you can see a miniscule benefit.
I wasn't expecting much of a gain from this, just wanted to verify that
it's not making things worse. So looks good to me.
- Heikki
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
image/png | 6.5 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2013-06-18 07:30:57 | Re: Patch for removng unused targets |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2013-06-18 04:51:23 | Re: Patch for fail-back without fresh backup |