Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex
От | Aleksander Alekseev |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20151218081009.34ea4c04@fujitsu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> Oh, that's an interesting idea. I guess the problem is that if the > freelist is unshared, then users might get an error that the lock > table is full when some other partition still has elements remaining. True, but I don't believe it should be a real problem assuming we have a strong hash function. If user get such an error it means that database is under heavy load and there is not much more free elements in other tables either. This particular user didn't get lucky, some other will. Anyway administrator should do something about it - fight DDoS attack, tune database parameters, etc. > 3.5-4 more TPS, or 3.5 times more TPS? Can you share the actual > numbers? Oops, 3.5-4 _times_ more TPS, i.e. 2206 TPS vs 546 TPS.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: