On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:37 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it is former (8 socket machine).

I confirm this is 8 sockets machine(cthulhu)

> You point related to high-client count is valid and I am sure it won't
> give noticeable benefit at lower client-count as the the
> CLOGControlLock contention starts impacting only at high-client count.
> I am not sure if it is good idea to reject a patch which helps in
> stabilising the performance (helps in falling off the cliff) when the
> processes increases the number of cores (or hardware threads)
>>  If you have to work that hard
>> to find a big win, and tests under more reasonable conditions show no
>> benefit, it's not clear to me that it's really worth the time we're
>> all spending benchmarking and reviewing this, or the risk of bugs, or
>> the damage to the SLRU abstraction layer.
> I agree with you unless it shows benefit on somewhat more usual
> scenario's, we should not accept it.  So shouldn't we wait for results
> of other workloads like simple-update or tpc-b on bigger machines
> before reaching to conclusion?


My test are under run, I will post it soon..

Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

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

Reply via email to