Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmobzgZ6We+cnxToM7FypFN+WQpAOnSjbrNzoOaiPuE7rfg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile (Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks,
CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile
Re: 9.2beta1, parallel queries, ReleasePredicateLocks, CheckForSerializableConflictIn in the oprofile |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> wrote: > A simpler idea would be to collapse UnpinBuffer() / PinBuffer() pairs > by queing UnpinBuffer() requests for a while before actually updating > shared state. So, what happens when somebody wants a cleanup lock on the buffer you've decided to keep pinned? We have this problem already; I'm wary of making it worse. > We'd drain the unpin queue whenever we don't expect a PinBuffer() request > to happen for a while. Returning to the main loop is an obvious such place, > but there might be others. However, on a workload like pgbench -S, dropping the pin when you return to the main loop would render the optimization useless. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: