Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmobTZHXfMPMAU6NNGWUNEeM8ZtVCAS2r5QWjU60L6t3KGw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
Responses Re: Removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE  (Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> Your intuition here is better than mine, but I am still missing
> something here. If we keep the buffer pinned, then there will be very
> few pin/unpin cycles here, so I don't see where the contention would
> come from (any more than there is contention pinning the root of an
> index).

Based on previous measurements, I think there *is* contention pinning
the root of an index.  Currently, I believe it's largely overwhelmed
by contention from other sources, such as the buffer manager lwlocks
and the very-evil ProcArrayLock.  However, I believe that as we fix
those problems, this will start to percolate up towards the top of the
heap.

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



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP json generation enhancements : strange IS NULL behaviour
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP json generation enhancements