Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Christian Kruse <christian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition
Date: 2014-02-04 19:44:28
Message-ID: CAM3SWZTMqYiwwXbMFiOoLc2=RhqmSxm2QBkOEwQfcb8_=hwNbA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Christian Kruse
<christian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm doing some benchmarks regarding this problem: one set with
> baseline and one set with your patch. Machine was a 32 core machine (4
> CPUs with 8 cores), 252 gib RAM. Both versions have the type align
> patch applied.

It certainly seems as if the interesting cases are where clients > cores.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-02-04 19:48:14 Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition
Previous Message Christian Kruse 2014-02-04 19:39:04 Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition