Re: Changing WAL Header to reduce contention during ReserveXLogInsertLocation()

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Changing WAL Header to reduce contention during ReserveXLogInsertLocation()
Date: 2018-03-09 15:19:15
Message-ID: 923aa0c2-4fd0-f627-8c4b-12375c0e81d4@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2/1/18 19:21, Simon Riggs wrote:
> If we really can't persuade you of that, it doesn't sink the patch. We
> can have the WAL pointer itself - it wouldn't save space but it would
> at least alleviate the spinlock.

Do you want to send in an alternative patch that preserves the WAL
pointer and only changes the locking?

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-03-09 16:07:55 Re: PATCH: logical_work_mem and logical streaming of large in-progress transactions
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2018-03-09 15:17:57 Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11