Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20160822024044.cce36j45obqm6dji@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT? (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Should we cacheline align PGXACT?
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-08-19 09:46:12 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> writes: > > originally this idea was proposed by Andres Freund while experimenting with > > lockfree Pin/UnpinBuffer [1]. > > The patch is attached as well as results of pgbench -S on 72-cores > > machine. As before it shows huge benefit in this case. > > That's one mighty ugly patch. My version of it was only intended to nail down some variability on the pgpro machine, it wasn't intended for submission. > Can't you do it without needing to introduce the additional layer of > struct nesting? If we required support for anonymous unions, such things would be a lot easier to do. That aside, the only alternative seems tob e hard-coding padding space - which probably isn't all that un-fragile either.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: