| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> |
| Cc: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes |
| Date: | 2016-09-11 05:01:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1K9=C6Z=zBY4x60XvvPoCDYznMqhTsX_HQF_MoxVLO0Ag@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Mark Kirkwood
<mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> wrote:
>
>
> performed several 10 hour runs on size 100 database using 32 and 64 clients.
> For the last run I rebuilt with assertions enabled. No hangs or assertion
> failures.
>
Thanks for verification. Do you think we can do some read-only
workload benchmarking using this server? If yes, then probably you
can use concurrent hash index patch [1] and cache the metapage patch
[2] (I think Mithun needs to rebase his patch) to do so.
[1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1J6b8O4PcEPqRxNYbLVbfToNMJEEm+qn0jZX31-obXrJw@mail.gmail.com
[2] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD__OuhJ29CeBif_fLGe4t9Vj_-cFXBwCXhjO+D_16TXbemY+g@mail.gmail.com
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-09-11 05:15:15 | Re: pg_sequence catalog |
| Previous Message | Vitaly Burovoy | 2016-09-11 03:38:43 | Re: sequence data type |