Re: Fastpath while arranging the changes in LSN order in logical decoding

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Fastpath while arranging the changes in LSN order in logical decoding
Date: 2020-03-07 04:29:38
Message-ID: CAFiTN-vBOiqsh6iUc0pdxJSh9D-NEpHLYhjCLs3=x5W=k+98xg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sat, Mar 7, 2020 at 12:30 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2020-01-08 18:06:52 +0530, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Jan 2020 at 5:28 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> >
> > > On 25/11/2019 05:52, Dilip Kumar wrote:
> > > > In logical decoding, while sending the changes to the output plugin we
> > > > need to arrange them in the LSN order. But, if there is only one
> > > > transaction which is a very common case then we can avoid building the
> > > > binary heap. A small patch is attached for the same.
> > >
> > > Does this make any measurable performance difference? Building a
> > > one-element binary heap seems pretty cheap.
> >
> >
> > I haven’t really measured the performance for this. I will try to do that
> > next week. Thanks for looking into this.
>
> Did you do that?

I tried once in my local machine but could not produce consistent
results. I will try this once again in the performance machine and
report back.

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2020-03-07 05:06:30 Re: More tests to stress directly checksum_impl.h
Previous Message Dilip Kumar 2020-03-07 04:26:58 Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager