Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 4EEB3E90.6030300@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Moving more work outside WALInsertLock
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 16.12.2011 14:37, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> Anyway, I'm looking at ways to make the memcpy() of the payload happen >> without the lock, in parallel, and once you do that the record header CRC >> calculation can be done in parallel, too. That makes it irrelevant from a >> performance point of view whether the prev-link is included in the CRC or >> not. > > Better plan. So we keep the prev link in the CRC. > > I already proposed a design for that using page-level share locks any > reason not to go with that? Sorry, I must've missed that. Got a link? -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: