What is the recommended procedure for replying to a pgsql-committers messsage? Is cross-posting to hackers really the right approach, as it causes duplicate messages. (pgsql-committers CC removed.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:38:56AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2016-04-12 16:49:25 +0000, Kevin Grittner wrote: > > On a big NUMA machine with 1000 connections in saturation load > > there was a performance regression due to spinlock contention, for > > acquiring values which were never used. Just fill with dummy > > values if we're not going to use them. > > FWIW, I could see massive regressions with just 64 connections. > > I'm a bit scared of having an innoccuous sounding option regress things > by a factor of 10. I think, in addition to this fix, we need to actually > solve the scalability issue here to a good degree. One way to do so is > to apply the parts of 0001 in > http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/20160330230914.GH13305%40awork2.anarazel.de > defining PG_HAVE_8BYTE_SINGLE_COPY_ATOMICITY and rely on that. Another > to apply the whole patch and simply put the lsn in an 8 byte atomic. > > - Andres > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-committers mailing list (pgsql-committ...@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-committers -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
