On 2014-11-11 09:29:22 +0000, Thom Brown wrote: > On 26 September 2014 12:40, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > But this gets at another point: the way we're benchmarking this right > > > now, we're really conflating the effects of three different things: > > > > > > 1. Changing the locking regimen around the freelist and clocksweep. > > > 2. Adding a bgreclaimer process. > > > 3. Raising the number of buffer locking partitions. > > > > First of all thanks for committing part-1 of this changes and it > > seems you are planing to commit part-3 based on results of tests > > which Andres is planing to do and for remaining part (part-2), today > > > > Were parts 2 and 3 committed in the end?
3 was committed. 2 wasn't because it's not yet clear whether how beneficial it is generally. 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
