Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Alexander Korotkov
Тема Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines
Дата
Msg-id CAPpHfdvvEpOH5B-Sc7khTecXczka9ur88b4WMmd813f=ik6WVQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines  (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines  (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>)
Re: LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 11:31 PM, Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de> wrote:
> UPD: It appears that Postgres Pro have access to big Power machine
> now.
> So, I can do testing/benchmarking myself.

We currently also have access to a LPAR on an E850 machine with 4
sockets POWER8 running a Ubuntu 16.04 LTS Server ppc64el OS. I can do
some tests next week, if you need to verify your findings.

Very good, thank you!

I tried lwlock-power-2.patch on multicore Power machine we have in PostgresPro.
I realized that using labels in assembly isn't safe.  Thus, I removed labels and use relative jumps instead (lwlock-power-2.patch).
Unfortunately, I didn't manage to make any reasonable benchmarks.  This machine runs AIX, and there are a lot of problems which prevents PostgreSQL to show high TPS.  Installing Linux there is not an option too, because that machine is used for tries to make Postgres work properly on AIX.
So, benchmarking help is very relevant.  I would very appreciate that.

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

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Possible spelling fixes
Следующее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers