Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers
| От | Metin Doslu |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAL1dPce25L_X2a_QebJyC4rHhmYVaR8xQBud0y799opY9JKqpw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
> You could try my lwlock-scalability improvement patches - for some
> workloads here, the improvements have been rather noticeable. Which
> version are you testing?
> workloads here, the improvements have been rather noticeable. Which
> version are you testing?
I tried your patches on next link. As you suspect I didn't see any improvements. I tested it on PostgreSQL 9.2 Stable.
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
On 2013-12-04 20:19:55 +0200, Metin Doslu wrote:You could try my lwlock-scalability improvement patches - for some
> - When we increased NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS to 1024, this problem is
> disappeared for 8 core machines and come back with 16 core machines on
> Amazon EC2. Would it be related with PostgreSQL locking mechanism?
workloads here, the improvements have been rather noticeable. Which
version are you testing?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: