Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nMJWbXiVkrDKJPdAdwghzZAr-hpy3rUEBP8qXD0nOaLZRA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 10.10.2011 21:25, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: >> >> I agree it is better versus SELECT FOR, but what about repeatable read >> versus >> the new serializable? How much overhead is there in the 'monitoring of >> read/write dependencies'? This is my only concern at the moment. Are we >> talking insignificant overhead? Minor? Is it measurable? Hard to say >> without >> knowing the number of txns, number of locks, etc.? > > I'm sure it does depend heavily on all of those things, but IIRC Kevin ran > some tests earlier in the spring and saw a 5% slowdown. That feels like > reasonable initial guess to me. If you can run some tests and measure the > overhead in your application, it would be nice to hear about it. How do we turn it on/off to allow the overhead to be measured? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: