Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1LHN6j3cR3wo0vN7+hzKW12oDOxj1yEcuN8yKkegyXPBg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794 (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
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.
>
>
> 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?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: