Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager
| От | Masahiko Sawada |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAD21AoBvkGiqWUBi5g_7eDixUXDJ6t7u-7gnV1Qqn4cu-9aFsQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Moving relation extension locks out of heavyweight lock manager
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 1:40 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:40 AM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote: >> The probability of performance degradation can be reduced by >> increasing N_RELEXTLOCK_ENTS. But as Robert mentioned, while keeping >> fast and simple implementation like acquiring lock by a few atomic >> operation it's hard to improve or at least keep the current >> performance on all cases. I was thinking that this patch is necessary >> by parallel DML operations and vacuum but if the community cannot >> accept this approach it might be better to mark it as "Rejected" and >> then I should reconsider the design of parallel vacuum. > > I'm sorry that I didn't get time to work further on this during the > CommitFest. Never mind. There was a lot of items especially at the last CommitFest. > In terms of moving forward, I'd still like to hear what > Andres has to say about the comments I made on March 1st. Yeah, agreed. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: