Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins
| От | Andres Freund |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 20140409133834.GI4161@awork2.anarazel.de обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [RFC, POC] Don't require a NBuffer sized
PrivateRefCount array of local buffer pins
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-04-09 09:17:59 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > I've tried to reproduce problems around this (when I wrote this), but > > it's really hard to construct cases that need more than 8 pins. I've > > tested performance for those cases by simply not using the array, and > > while the performance suffers a bit, it's not that bad. > > Suspended queries won't do it? What exactly do you mean by "suspended" queries? Defined and started portals? Recursive query execution? > Also, it would be good to quantify "not that bad". The 'not bad' comes from my memory of the benchmarks I'd done after about 12h of flying around ;). Yes, it needs real benchmarks. Probably won't get to it the next few days tho. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: