| From: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flushing large data immediately in pqcomm |
| Date: | 2024-04-06 12:51:03 |
| Message-ID: | CAApHDvrg7MbzcgVY4LF3aRUYR57ox3K5VycE7NytbgMT=n37zw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 6 Apr 2024 at 23:17, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> wrote:
> Weird that on your machines you don't see a difference. Are you sure
> you didn't make a silly mistake, like not restarting postgres or
> something?
I'm sure. I spent quite a long time between the AMD and an Apple m2 trying.
I did see the same regression as you on the smaller numbers. I
experimented with the attached which macro'ifies internal_flush() and
pg_noinlines internal_flush_buffer.
Can you try that to see if it gets rid of the regression on the first two tests?
David
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| flush_macro_noinline.patch | text/plain | 3.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2024-04-06 13:40:11 | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2024-04-06 12:36:28 | Re: Add bump memory context type and use it for tuplesorts |