Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
Date
Msg-id 200110011849.f91InjE14963@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
List pgsql-hackers
> This is still missing a bet since it fails to mention the option of
> adjusting -B and -N instead of changing kernel parameters, but that's
> easily fixed.  I propose that we reword this message and the semget
> one to mention first the option of changing -B/-N and second the option
> of changing kernel parameters.  Then we could consider raising the
> default -B setting to something more realistic.

Yes, we could do that but it makes things harder for newbies and really
isn't the right numbers for production use anyway.  I think anyone using
default values should see a message asking them to tune it.  Can we
throw a message during initdb?  Of course, we don't have a running
backend at that point so you would always throw a message.

From postmaster startup, by default, could we try larger amounts of
buffer memory until it fails then back off and allocate that?  Seems
like a nice default to me.


--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
 


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Lockhart
Date:
Subject: Re: CVS changes
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: patch contrib/intarray to current CVS