Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alexander Korotkov
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?
Дата
Msg-id CAPpHfduF9Fn7=SSYAY1=Vfb_q59EqGrs8+ASECizBE-68VOvdg@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?  (Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 2:47 PM, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> wrote:
> On 04 Apr 2017, at 14:58, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:
>
> On 4/4/17 8:55 AM, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:58 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de
>>
>>    I'm inclined to push this to the next CF, it seems we need a lot more
>>    benchmarking here.
>>
>> No objections.
>
> This submission has been moved to CF 2017-07.

This CF has now started (well, 201709 but that’s what was meant in above), can
we reach closure on this patch in this CF?

During previous commitfest I come to doubts if this patch is really needed when same effect could be achieved by another (perhaps random) change of alignment.  The thing I can do now is to retry my benchmark on current master and check what effect this patch has now.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company 

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alexander Korotkov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Use MINVALUE/MAXVALUE insteadof UNBOUNDED for range partition b