Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
От | Haribabu Kommi |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAJrrPGeYh2_=AqZr9WCO86xV+JwY+L6bMWSxMSx5xwHJsaHwHA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:38 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 11:31 PM, Tomas Vondra
>> The difference is that both the fast-path locks and msgNumLock went into
>> 9.2, so that end users probably never saw that regression. But we don't know
>> if that happens for clog and WAL.
>>
>> Perhaps you have a working patch addressing the WAL contention, so that we
>> could see how that changes the results?
>
> I don't think we do, yet.
>
Right. At this stage, we are just evaluating the ways (basic idea is
to split the OS writes and Flush requests in separate locks) to reduce
it. It is difficult to speculate results at this stage. I think
after spending some more time (probably few weeks), we will be in
position to share our findings.
As per my understanding the current state of the patch is waiting for the
performance results from author.
Moved to next CF with "waiting on author" status. Please feel free to
update the status if the current status differs with the actual patch status.
Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: