On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:

> On March 21, 2016 5:12:38 AM GMT+01:00, Amit Kapila <
> amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >The article pointed by you justifies that the way ResetEvent is done by
> >patch is correct.  I am not sure, but you can weigh, if there is a need
> >of
> >comment so that if we want enhance this part of code (or want to write
> >something similar) in future, we don't need to rediscover this fact.
> I've added a reference in a comment.
> Did you have a chance of running the patched versions on windows?
I am planning to do it in next few hours.

> I plan to push this sometime today, so I can get on to some performance
> patches I was planning to look into committing.
have we done testing to ensure that it actually mitigate the impact of
performance degradation due to commit  ac1d794. I wanted to do that, but
unfortunately the hight-end m/c on which this problem is reproducible is

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

Reply via email to