Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
Дата
Msg-id 5676.1001789982@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
Список pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> No scale factor, as I illustrated from the initialization command I
> used.  Standard buffers too.  Let me know what values I should use for
> testing.

Scale factor has to be >= max number of clients you use, else you're
just measuring serialization on the "branch" rows.

I think the default NBuffers (64) is too low to give meaningful
performance numbers, too.  I've been thinking that maybe we should
raise it to 1000 or so by default.  This would trigger startup failures
on platforms with small SHMMAX, but we could tell people to use -B until
they get around to fixing their kernel settings.  It's been a long time
since we fit into a 1-MB shared memory segment at the default settings
anyway, so maybe it's time to select somewhat-realistic defaults.
What we have now is neither very useful nor the lowest common
denominator...
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: iscachable settings for datetime functions
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Preparation for Beta