Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM.

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Krunal Bauskar <krunalbauskar(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM.
Date: 2020-11-26 05:06:15
Message-ID: X783xxbOWZ5YqWDr@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:00:50AM +0530, Krunal Bauskar wrote:
> (Thanks to Amit Khandekar for rigorously performance testing this patch
> with different combinations).

For the simple-update and tpcb-like graphs, do you have any actual
numbers to share between 128 and 1024 connections? The blue lines
look like they are missing some measurements in-between, so it is hard
to tell if this is an actual improvement or just some lack of data.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Krunal Bauskar 2020-11-26 05:14:41 Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM.
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2020-11-26 04:59:23 Re: PoC: custom signal handler for extensions