Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoaNA8HZUV+VsZzQqjiqphmxv1zLLosdvEUn=i0_aYB-fg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: s_lock() seems too aggressive for machines with many sockets  (Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Jan Wieck <jan@wi3ck.info> wrote:
> The whole thing turns out to be based on wrong baseline data, taken with a
> pgbench client running from a remote machine. It all started out from an
> investigation against 9.3. Curiously enough, the s_lock() problem that
> existed in 9.3 has a very similar effect on throughput as a network
> bottleneck has on 9.5.

So, changing max_spins_per_delay no longer helps on 9.5?

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: "could not adopt C locale" failure at startup on Windows
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Auto-vacuum is not running in 9.1.12