Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1KiO5ZoJKNpeqoMswuT6SdPQ+1XJ=CspF4jSN439k9bjw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
> >
> >
> > How hard did you try checking whether this causes regressions? This
> > increases the number of atomics in the commit path a fair bit. I doubt
> > it's really bad, but it seems like a good idea to benchmark something
> > like a single full-throttle writer and a large number of readers.
> >
>
> I think the case which you want to stress is when the patch doesn't
> have any benefit (like single writer case)
>

I mean to say single writer, multiple readers.


With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Reduce ProcArrayLock contention