Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
От | Dilip Kumar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFiTN-tK2H4mWDFiMxxAk65N2uXnwJHcsveqfNCyk=wh97aw5w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br /><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Andres Freund <spandir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:andres@anarazel.de" target="_blank">andres@anarazel.de</a>></span> wrote:<br /><blockquoteclass="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Soundslike a ppc vs. x86 issue. The regression was on the former, right?</blockquote></div><br/></div><div class="gmail_extra">Well, Regression what I reported last two time, out of thatone was on X86 and other was on PPC.<br /><br /><br />Copied from older Threads<br />--------------------------------------<br/>On PPC<br /><span class="im">>> > > > >> ./pgbench -j$-c$ -T300 -M prepared -S postgres<br />>> > > > >><br />>> > > > >> Client Base Patch<br />>> > > > >> 1 17169 16454<br />>> > > > >> 8 108547 105559<br />>> > > > >> 32 241619 262818<br />>> > > > >> 64 206868 233606<br />>> > > > >> 128 137084 217013</span><br /><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">OnX86<br /><span><span class="im">>> > > > >></span>Shared Buffer= 8GB<br /></span><span><spanclass="im">>> > > > >></span>Scale Factor=300</span><span class="im"><br /><br /><span></span></span><spanclass="im"><span><span class="im">>> > > > >></span>./pgbench -j$ -c$ -T300-M prepared -S postgres</span><br /></span><span class="im">>> > > > >></span>client base patch<br /><span class="im">>> > > > >></span>1 7057 5230<br /><spanclass="im">>> > > > >></span>2 10043 9573<br /><span class="im">>>> > > >></span>4 20140 18188<br /></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br/><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">And this latest result (no regression) is on X86 but on mylocal machine.<br /><br /></div><div class="gmail_extra">I did not exactly saw what this new version of patch is doingdifferent, so I will test this version in other machines also and see the results. <br /></div><div class="gmail_extra"><brclear="all" /><br />-- <br /><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80);font-size:12.8px">Regards,</span><brstyle="color:rgb(80,0,80);font-size:12.8px" /><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80);font-size:12.8px">DilipKumar</span><br style="color:rgb(80,0,80);font-size:12.8px" /><span style="color:rgb(80,0,80);font-size:12.8px">EnterpriseDB: </span><ahref="http://www.enterprisedb.com/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204);font-size:12.8px"target="_blank">http://www.enterprisedb.com</a><br /></div></div></div></div>
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: