Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoZuNZ5j1U3=3TO=+d-yW6nNSbcYo6=g8oB7BwtOf30=bw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 11:22 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > That idea won't work as we need to separately register tranche for > each process. The other wayout could be to do it in CreateSharedProcArray() > which will be quite similar to what we do for other tranches and > it will cover all kind of processes. Attached patch fixes this problem. > > I have considered to separately do it in InitProcessPhase2() and > InitAuxiliaryProcess(), but then the registration will be done twice for > some > of the processes like bootstrap and same is true if we do this InitProcess() > instead of InitProcessPhase2() and I think it won't be similar to what > we do for other tranches. > > I have done the performance testing of the attached patch and the > results are attached with this mail. The main tests conducted are > pgbench read-write and read-only tests and the results indicate that > this patch doesn't introduce any regression, though you will see some > cases where the performance is better with patch by ~5% and then > regressed by 2~3%, but I think it is more of a noise, then anything > else. Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: