Re: Adding CI to our tree

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Subject: Re: Adding CI to our tree
Date: 2022-03-10 03:54:13
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+Y_9PNuLsLXi-_8CqcMJ6+OW-NuGE6vwDKSVMCnCiKqA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 4:33 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2022-03-10 15:43:16 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > I'm confused.
>
> The "terrible IO wait" thing was before we reduced the number of CPUs and
> concurrent jobs. It makes sense to me that with just two CPUs we're CPU bound,
> in which case -Og obviously can make a difference.

Oh, duh, yeah, that makes sense when you put it that way and
considering the CPU graph:

-O0: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/4578631912521728
-Og: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5239486182326272

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com 2022-03-10 05:10:34 RE: Skipping logical replication transactions on subscriber side
Previous Message Andres Freund 2022-03-10 03:33:47 Re: Adding CI to our tree