Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20140925142453.GE9633@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-09-25 10:22:47 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > That leads me to wonder: Have you measured different, lower, number of > > buffer mapping locks? 128 locks is, if we'd as we should align them > > properly, 8KB of memory. Common L1 cache sizes are around 32k... > > Amit has some results upthread showing 64 being good, but not as good > as 128. I haven't verified that myself, but have no reason to doubt > it. How about you push the spinlock change and I crosscheck the partition number on a multi socket x86 machine? Seems worthwile to make sure that it doesn't cause problems on x86. I seriously doubt it'll, but ... Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: