On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:00 AM, David Steele <da...@pgmasters.net> wrote:
> On 2/26/16 11:37 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com
>>     Here, we can see that there is a gain of ~15% to ~38% at higher
>>     client count.
>>     The attached document (perf_write_clogcontrollock_data_v6.ods)
>>     contains data, mainly focussing on single client performance.  The
>>     data is for multiple runs on different machines, so I thought it is
>>     better to present in form of document rather than dumping everything
>>     in e-mail.  Do let me know if there is any confusion in
>>     understanding/interpreting the data.
>> Forgot to mention that all these tests have been done by
>> reverting commit-ac1d794.
> This patch no longer applies cleanly:
> $ git apply ../other/group_update_clog_v6.patch
> error: patch failed: src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c:404
> error: src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c: patch does not apply
> error: patch failed: src/include/storage/proc.h:152
> error: src/include/storage/proc.h: patch does not apply

For me, with patch -p1 < <path_of_patch> it works, but any how I have
updated the patch based on recent commit.  Can you please check the latest
patch and see if it applies cleanly for you now.

> It's not clear to me whether Robert has completed a review of this code
or it still needs to be reviewed more comprehensively.
> Other than a comment that needs to be fixed it seems that all questions
have been answered by Amit.

I have updated the comments and changed the name of one of a variable from
"all_trans_same_page" to "all_xact_same_page" as pointed out offlist by

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Attachment: group_update_clog_v7.patch
Description: Binary data

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to