On March 31, 2016 7:16:33 AM GMT+02:00, Noah Misch <n...@leadboat.com> wrote: >On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 01:10:56AM -0400, Noah Misch wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 02:15:50PM +0200, Andres Freund wrote: >> > On 2016-03-27 02:34:32 +0530, Ashutosh Sharma wrote: >> > > As mentioned in my earlier mail i was not able to apply >> > > *pinunpin-cas-5.patch* on commit *6150a1b0, >> > >> > That's not surprising; that's pretty old. >> > >> > > *therefore i thought of applying it on the latest commit and i >was >> > > able to do it successfully. I have now taken the performance >readings >> > > at latest commit i.e. *76281aa9* with and without applying >> > > *pinunpin-cas-5.patch* and my observations are as follows, >> > > >> > >> > > 1. I can still see that the current performance lags by 2-3% from >the >> > > expected performance when *pinunpin-cas-5.patch *is applied on >the commit >> > > >> > > *76281aa9.* >> > > 2. When *pinunpin-cas-5.patch *is ignored and performance is >measured at >> > > commit *76281aa9 *the overall performance lags by 50-60% from the >expected >> > > performance. >> > > >> > > *Note:* Here, the expected performance is the performance >observed before >> > > commit *6150a1b0 *when* ac1d794 *is reverted. >> > >> > Thanks for doing these benchmarks. What's the performance if you >revert >> > 6150a1b0 on top of a recent master? There've been a lot of other >patches >> > influencing performance since 6150a1b0, so minor performance >differences >> > aren't necessarily meaningful; especially when that older version >then >> > had other patches reverted. >> >> [This is a generic notification.] >> >> The above-described topic is currently a PostgreSQL 9.6 open item. >Andres, >> since you committed the patch believed to have created it, you own >this open >> item. If that responsibility lies elsewhere, please let us know >whose >> responsibility it is to fix this. Since new open items may be >discovered at >> any time and I want to plan to have them all fixed well in advance of >the ship >> date, I will appreciate your efforts toward speedy resolution. >Please >> present, within 72 hours, a plan to fix the defect within seven days >of this >> message. Thanks. > >My attribution above was incorrect. Robert Haas is the committer and >owner of >this one. I apologize.
Fine in this case I guess. I've posted a proposal nearby either way, it appears to be a !x86 problem. Andres -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers