On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Hm, interesting. I suspect that's because of the missing backoff in my > experimental patch. If you apply the attached patch ontop of that > (requires infrastructure from pinunpin), how does performance develop? > I have applied this patch also, but still results are same, I mean around 550,000 with 64 threads and 650,000 with 128 client with lot of fluctuations.. *128 client **(head+**0001-WIP-Avoid-the-use-of-a-separate-spinlock-to-protect +pinunpin-cas-9+backoff)* run1 645769 run2 643161 run3 *285546* run4 *289421* run5 630772 run6 *284363* -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
