On 2015-06-23 21:08:36 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@ymail.com> wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> >>> <listitem>
> >>> <para>
> >>> Improve concurrent locking and buffer scan performance (Andres
> >>> Freund, Kevin Grittner)
> >>> </para>
> >>> </listitem>
> >>
> >> If this is ab5194e6f, I don't think it makes sense to mention "buffer
> >> scan" - it's just any lwlock, and buffer locks aren't the primary
> >> benefit (ProcArrayLock, buffer mapping lock probably are that). I also
> >
> >> don't think Kevin was involved?
> >
> > It seems likely that 2ed5b87f9 was combined with something else in
> > this reference. By reducing buffer pins and buffer content locking
> > during btree index scans it shows a slight performance gain in
> > btree scans and avoids some blocking of btree index vacuuming.
Oh. That's what it was combined with. I don't think it makes sense to
throw these three items together into one note. Their benefit/risk
potential is pretty different.
> I think maybe we should separate that back out. The list needs to be
> user-accessible, but if it's hard to understand what it's referring
> to, that's not good either.
Yea. And if then Bruce goes and compares feature counts... :)
Greetings,
Andres Freund
