Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
Дата
Msg-id 2616.1130004322@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, you tried to "scale" into a domain where the performance is going
>> to be disk-I/O-limited, so I'm not sure it proves anything.

> Good point. I took a 5% random extract from the lineitems table and saw 
> the expected improvement.

Sounds better.  Certainly there are cases where CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS
isn't going to be a meaningful drag on performance, but there are others
where it will be.

BTW, looking at the code some more, I am thinking that checking
pgwin32_signal_event should be completely unnecessary in
pgwin32_check_queued_signals; that is, if UNBLOCKED_SIGNAL_QUEUE() is
nonzero we might as well just enter pgwin32_dispatch_queued_signals
unconditionally.  The only usefulness of calling WaitForSingleObjectEx
is to allow any pending APCs to be dispatched.  Are there any other
APCs queued against the main thread besides the timer.c one?
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance
Следующее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCHES] Win32 CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS() performance