| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Nils Goroll <slink(at)schokola(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog(at)svana(dot)org>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: experimental: replace s_lock spinlock code with pthread_mutex on linux |
| Date: | 2012-06-28 15:29:10 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobwvB7GxxY=LZZALFwH8m8jgfzMuD-aYRPgxU0=w0pTeA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Also, 20 transactions per connection is not enough of a run to make
> any evaluation on.
FWIW, I kicked off a looong benchmarking run on this a couple of days
ago on the IBM POWER7 box, testing pgbench -S, regular pgbench, and
pgbench --unlogged-tables at various client counts with and without
the patch; three half-hour test runs for each test configuration. It
should be done tonight and I will post the results once they're in.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Pflug | 2012-06-28 15:34:13 | Re: [v9.3] Row-Level Security |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-06-28 15:29:09 | Re: [v9.3] Row-Level Security |