| From: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: opportunistic tuple freezing |
| Date: | 2009-09-16 03:56:38 |
| Message-ID: | f67928030909152056w7d4cbb17o54999ac85028720d@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 2:07 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 10:22 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > As always with patches that are meant to improve performance,
> > some experimental evidence would be a good thing.
>
> I haven't had time to performance test this patch yet, and it looks like
> it will take a significant amount of effort to do so. I'm focusing on my
> other work, so I don't know if this one is going to be in shape for the
> September commitfest.
>
> If someone is interested in doing some performance testing for this
> patch, let me know. I still think it has potential.
>
Under what kind of circumstances/workload to you think this patch is most
likely to show its full potential? I can try to test it out, but would like
some guidance. I am guessing it is when the anti-wrap around vacuums come
due, but that is such a rare event, it could both be hard to test for and
also be of limited real-world applicability.
Cheers,
Jeff (Janes)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2009-09-16 04:06:57 | Re: query cancel issues in contrib/dblink |
| Previous Message | Itagaki Takahiro | 2009-09-16 03:46:28 | dblink doesn't transfar non-error meesages |