Re: HOT is applied
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: HOT is applied |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5424.1190388137@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: HOT is applied ("Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: HOT is applied
Re: HOT is applied |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes: > If you look at the callgraph, you'll see that those > LWLockAcquire/Release calls are coming from HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum -> > TransactionIdIsInProgress, which keeps trashing the ProcArrayLock. A > "if(TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId(xid)) return true;" check in > TransactionIdIsInProgress would speed that up, but I wonder if there's a > more general solution to make HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum cheaper. For > example, we could cache the in-progress status of tuples. Dunno about "more general", but your idea reduces the runtime of this example by about 50% (22.2s to 10.5s) for me. I'm worried though that it would be a net negative in more typical situations, especially if you've got a lot of open subtransactions. regards, tom lane *** src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c.orig Sat Sep 8 16:31:15 2007 --- src/backend/storage/ipc/procarray.c Fri Sep 21 11:08:34 2007 *************** *** 341,346 **** --- 341,353 ---- return false; } + /* + * Also, we can detect our own transaction without any access to shared + * memory. + */ + if (TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId(xid)) + return true; + /* Get workspace to remember main XIDs in */ xids = (TransactionId *) palloc(sizeof(TransactionId) * arrayP->maxProcs);
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: