Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mark Kirkwood
Subject Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes
Date
Msg-id 91b24fbc-2dc5-eaa0-d601-f2fe861794d9@catalyst.net.nz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes  (Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>)
List pgsql-hackers

On 11/09/16 17:01, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Mark Kirkwood
> <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz> wrote:
>>
>> performed several 10 hour runs on size 100 database using 32 and 64 clients.
>> For the last run I rebuilt with assertions enabled. No hangs or assertion
>> failures.
>>
> Thanks for verification.  Do you think we can do some read-only
> workload benchmarking using this server?  If yes, then probably you
> can use concurrent hash index patch [1] and cache the metapage patch
> [2] (I think Mithun needs to rebase his patch) to do so.
>
>
>
> [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1J6b8O4PcEPqRxNYbLVbfToNMJEEm+qn0jZX31-obXrJw@mail.gmail.com
> [2] - https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAD__OuhJ29CeBif_fLGe4t9Vj_-cFXBwCXhjO+D_16TXbemY+g@mail.gmail.com
>
>

I can do - are we checking checking for hangs/assertions or comparing 
patched vs unpatched performance (for the metapage patch)?

regards

Mark



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Emre Hasegeli
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Alter or rename enum value
Next
From: Mark Kirkwood
Date:
Subject: Re: Write Ahead Logging for Hash Indexes