Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines
| От | Alexander Korotkov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAPpHfduO1p8aE8ZY33rMcoqG7gBhQL6P=rV6OHLH2HS6TXiHzA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
It doesn't seems to make sense to consider this patch unless we get access to suitable Power machine to reproduce benefits.
On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 2:16 AM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:I think unless such benchmarking is done in the next 24h we need to moveOn 2017-04-03 11:56:13 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Have you done x86 benchmarking?
this patch to the next CF...Thank you for your comments.I didn't x86 benchmarking. I even didn't manage to reproduce previous results on Power8.Presumably, it's because previous benchmarks were done on bare metal, while now I have to some kind of virtual machine on IBM E880 where I can't reproduce any win of Power8 LWLock optimization. But probably there is another reason.Thus, I'm moving this patch to the next CF.I see it's already moved. OK!
This is why I'm going to mark this patch "Returned with feedback".
Once we would get access to the appropriate machine, I will resubmit this patch.
The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: