On Nov 24, 2010, at 5:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Jeff Janes writes:
>> I've played a bit with hash_search_with_hash_value and found that most
>> of the time is spent on shared hash tables, not private ones. And the
>> time attributed to it for the shared hash tables mostly seems to be
>> due to th
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
>>
>> I've played a bit with hash_search_with_hash_value and found that most
>> of the time is spent on shared hash tables, not private ones. And the
>> time attributed to it for the shared h
Jeff Janes writes:
> I've played a bit with hash_search_with_hash_value and found that most
> of the time is spent on shared hash tables, not private ones. And the
> time attributed to it for the shared hash tables mostly seems to be
> due to the time it takes to fight cache lines away from other
On Wednesday 24 November 2010 23:34:46 Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 24 November 2010 22:14:04 Andres Freund wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday 24 November 2010 21:24:43 Robert Haas wrote:
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Jeff Janes wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 November 2010 22:14:04 Andres Freund wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 24 November 2010 21:24:43 Robert Haas wrote:
>>>
>>> Recarding LWLockAcquire costs:
>>> Yes, its pretty notice
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 November 2010 22:14:04 Andres Freund wrote:
>> On Wednesday 24 November 2010 21:24:43 Robert Haas wrote:
>>
>> Recarding LWLockAcquire costs:
>> Yes, its pretty noticeable - on loads of different usages. On a bunch of
>> produ
On Wednesday 24 November 2010 22:14:04 Andres Freund wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 November 2010 21:24:43 Robert Haas wrote:
> > I'd like to get access to a box with (a lot) more cores, to see
> > whether the lock stuff moves up in the profile. A big chunk of that
> > hash_search_with_hash_value overhe
On Wednesday 24 November 2010 21:24:43 Robert Haas wrote:
> I'd like to get access to a box with (a lot) more cores, to see
> whether the lock stuff moves up in the profile. A big chunk of that
> hash_search_with_hash_value overhead is coming from
> LockAcquireExtended. The __strcmp_sse2 is almos
Robert Haas writes:
> I did some profiling of pgbench -j 36 -c 36 -T 500 banging on my
> two-core desktop box - with synchronous_commit turned off to keep the
> fsyncs from dominating the profile - and got these results:
> 29634 4.7124 postgres base_yyparse
Seems like pgbenc
