On 2014-04-09 05:34:42 -0400, Simon Riggs wrote: > On 21 March 2014 14:22, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > That seems to work fairly well. On the few tests I could run on my > > laptop - I've done this during a flight - it's a small performance win > > in all cases I could test. While saving a fair amount of memory. > > We've got to the stage now that saving this much memory is essential, > so this patch is a must-have.
I think some patch like this is necessary - I am not 100% sure mine is the one true approach here, but it certainly seems simple enough. > Performance? Discussed many years ago, but I suspect the micro-tuning > of those earlier patches wasn't as good as it is here. It's a small win on small machines (my laptop, 16GB), so we need to retest with 128GB shared_buffers or such on bigger ones. There PrivateRefCount previously was the source of a large portion of the cache misses... Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
