| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | konstantin knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: eXtensible Transaction Manager API |
| Date: | 2015-11-02 03:17:20 |
| Message-ID: | CAMsr+YELCHx2gUuv0Jv3DnMxrGxph0VKRajqM2FkttX=3YiNvw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 31 October 2015 at 17:22, konstantin knizhnik
<k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> Waiting for your feedback
For anyone wondering about performance impact, there are some graphs
on page 23 of the PDF presentation. I didn't see anything else, and
the graphs don't seem to cover comparison of Pg with the XTM
transaction manager hooks and no DTM enabled vs Pg without the hooks,
i.e. the hook overhead its self.
Have you done much work on that? Personally I wouldn't expect to see
any meaningful overhead, but I'd really like to have numbers behind
that.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-11-02 04:23:58 | Re: Request: pg_cancel_backend variant that handles 'idle in transaction' sessions |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2015-11-02 02:46:37 | Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData() |