| From: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flushing large data immediately in pqcomm |
| Date: | 2024-03-21 09:58:40 |
| Message-ID: | CAGECzQTgup-uK9YXTM+24ib4VVk93RW_Stsh3KtHGZnrCybdyA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 at 01:24, Melih Mutlu <m(dot)melihmutlu(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> What if I do a simple comparison like PqSendStart == PqSendPointer instead of calling pq_is_send_pending()
Yeah, that sounds worth trying out. So the new suggestions to fix the
perf issues on small message sizes would be:
1. add "inline" to internal_flush function
2. replace pq_is_send_pending() with PqSendStart == PqSendPointer
3. (optional) swap the order of PqSendStart == PqSendPointer and len
>= PqSendBufferSize
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2024-03-21 10:00:00 | Re: Test 031_recovery_conflict.pl is not immune to autovacuum |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2024-03-21 09:51:18 | Re: automating RangeTblEntry node support |