| From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jesper Pedersen <jesper(dot)pedersen(at)redhat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
| Date: | 2016-03-22 14:36:13 |
| Message-ID: | CAA4eK1K9Z5L8rBu6nAk55oSTE4iC_aw=d+MyqpEy4UL6=aTG8w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> On 2016-03-22 18:19:48 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > I'm actually rather unconvinced that it's all that common that all
> > > subtransactions are on one page. If you have concurrency - otherwise
> > > there'd be not much point in this patch - they'll usually be heavily
> > > interleaved, no? You can argue that you don't care about subxacts,
> > > because they're more often used in less concurrent scenarios, but if
> > > that's the argument, it should actually be made.
> > >
> >
> > Note, that we are doing it only when a transaction has less than equal
to
> > 64 sub transactions.
>
> So?
>
They should fall on one page, unless they are heavily interleaved as
pointed by you. I think either subtransactions are present or not, this
patch won't help for bigger transactions.
I will address your other review comments and send an updated patch.
Thanks for the review.
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Petr Jediný | 2016-03-22 14:36:44 | Re: BRIN is missing in multicolumn indexes documentation |
| Previous Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2016-03-22 14:30:54 | Re: NOT EXIST for PREPARE |