On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 23:36 -0400, Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
So we can optimize away the scan through the procarray by doing two if
tests, one outside of the lock, one inside. In normal running, both will
be optimized away, though in read-only periods we would avoid
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 16:21 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
So we can optimize away the scan through the procarray by doing two if
tests, one outside of the lock, one inside. In normal running, both will
be optimized away, though in read-only periods we would avoid much work.
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 16:21 -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
So we can optimize away the scan through the procarray by doing two if
tests, one outside of the lock, one inside. In normal running, both will
be optimized away, though in read-only periods we would avoid much work.
How much work
In a thread on -perform it has been observed that our Read-Only
scalability is not as good as it could be. One problem being that we
need to scan the whole of the ProcArray to derive a snapshot, which
becomes the dominant task with many users.
If we think about a situation where write
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
In a thread on -perform it has been observed that our Read-Only
scalability is not as good as it could be. One problem being that we
need to scan the whole of the ProcArray to derive a snapshot, which
becomes the dominant task with many users.
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
In a thread on -perform it has been observed that our Read-Only
scalability is not as good as it could be. One problem being that we
need to scan the whole of the ProcArray to derive a
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
GetSnapshotData doesn't take an exclusive lock. Neither does start or
end of a read-only transaction. AFAIK there is no reason, and certainly
no shred of experimental evidence, to
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 13:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
In a thread on -perform it has been observed that our Read-Only
scalability is not as good as it could be. One problem being that we
need to scan the whole of the ProcArray to derive a snapshot,
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
GetSnapshotData doesn't take an exclusive lock. Neither does start or
end of a read-only transaction. AFAIK there
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 14:06 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
Supposing that the patch can be shown to improve performance for
all-read-only workloads, and supposing further that the patch can be
shown to have no material negative impact on write-heavy workloads, it
would also be interesting to
Simon,
So we can optimize away the scan through the procarray by doing two if
tests, one outside of the lock, one inside. In normal running, both will
be optimized away, though in read-only periods we would avoid much work.
How much work would it be to work up a test patch?
--
Josh Berkus
11 matches
Mail list logo
