Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | A8DA97CC-BBAB-4AD4-B8D4-415AF9AC76F9@anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On March 18, 2016 11:32:53 PM PDT, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: >On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> >wrote: >> >> On 2016-03-18 20:14:07 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: >> >> > I have done some >> > tests on Windows with 0003 patch which includes running the >regressions >> > (vcregress check) and it passes. Will look into it tomorrow once >again >and >> > share if I find anything wrong with it, but feel to proceed if you >want. >> >> Thanks for the testing thus far! Let's see what the buildfarm has to >> say. >> > >Won't the new code needs to ensure that ResetEvent(latchevent) should >get >called in case WaitForMultipleObjects() comes out when both >pgwin32_signal_event and latchevent are signalled at the same time? WaitForMultiple only reports the readiness of on event at a time, no? -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: