Services
24×7×365 Technical Support
Migration to PostgreSQL
High Availability Deployment
Database Audit
Remote DBA for PostgreSQL
Products
Postgres Pro Enterprise
Postgres Pro Standard
Cloud Solutions
Postgres Extensions
Resources
Blog
Documentation
Webinars
Videos
Presentations
Community
Events
Training Courses
Books
Demo Database
Mailing List Archives
About
Leadership team
Partners
Customers
In the News
Press Releases
Press Info
Services
24×7×365 Technical Support
Migration to PostgreSQL
High Availability Deployment
Database Audit
Remote DBA for PostgreSQL
Products
Postgres Pro Enterprise
Postgres Pro Standard
Cloud Solutions
Postgres Extensions
Resources
Blog
Documentation
Webinars
Videos
Presentations
Community
Events
Training Courses
Books
Demo Database
Mailing List Archives
About
Leadership team
Partners
Customers
In the News
Press Releases
Press Info
Facebook
Downloads
Home
>
mailing lists
Re: [HACKERS] Improve catcache/syscache performance. - Mailing list pgsql-hackers
From
amul sul
Subject
Re: [HACKERS] Improve catcache/syscache performance.
Date
September 20, 2017
18:56:50
Msg-id
CAAJ_b97qe-djtnrMb6O-K0Q7ebtpGSWEXxLZ-2vSvby_K44CxQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread
Raw
In response to
[HACKERS] Improve catcache/syscache performance.
(Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
Responses
Re: [HACKERS] Improve catcache/syscache performance.
List
pgsql-hackers
Tree view
Patch 0007:
1:
400 + /*
401 + * XXX: might be worthwhile to only handle oid sysattr, to reduce
402 + * overhead - it's the most common key.
403 + */
IMHO, let fix that as well. I tested this by fixing (see the attach patch) but does
not found much gain on my local centos vm (of course, the pgbench load
wasn't big enough).
2: How about have wrapping following condition in SearchCatCacheMiss() by unlikely():
if (IsBootstrapProcessingMode())
return NULL;
3: Can we have following assert in SearchCatCacheN() instead SearchSysCacheN(), so that we'll assert direct SearchCatCacheN() call as well?
Assert(SysCache[cacheId]->cc_nkeys == <N>);
Other than these concern, patch looks pretty reasonable to me.
Regards,
Amul
Attachment
0007_ex_handle_oid.patch
pgsql-hackers
by date:
Previous
From:
Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
20 September 2017, 18:55:47
Subject:
Re: [HACKERS] Partition-wise join for join between (declaratively)partitioned tables
Next
From:
Fabien COELHO
Date:
20 September 2017, 18:59:03
Subject:
Re: [HACKERS] psql - add ability to test whether a variable exists
Есть вопросы? Напишите нам!
Соглашаюсь с условиями обработки персональных данных
I confirm that I have read and accepted PostgresPro’s
Privacy Policy
.
I agree to get Postgres Pro discount offers and other marketing communications.
✖
×
×
Everywhere
Documentation
Mailing list
List:
all lists
pgsql-general
pgsql-hackers
buildfarm-members
pgadmin-hackers
pgadmin-support
pgsql-admin
pgsql-advocacy
pgsql-announce
pgsql-benchmarks
pgsql-bugs
pgsql-chat
pgsql-cluster-hackers
pgsql-committers
pgsql-cygwin
pgsql-docs
pgsql-hackers-pitr
pgsql-hackers-win32
pgsql-interfaces
pgsql-jdbc
pgsql-jobs
pgsql-novice
pgsql-odbc
pgsql-patches
pgsql-performance
pgsql-php
pgsql-pkg-debian
pgsql-pkg-yum
pgsql-ports
pgsql-rrreviewers
pgsql-ru-general
pgsql-sql
pgsql-students
pgsql-testers
pgsql-translators
pgsql-www
psycopg
Period
anytime
within last day
within last week
within last month
within last 6 months
within last year
Sort by
date
reverse date
rank
Services
24×7×365 Technical Support
Migration to PostgreSQL
High Availability Deployment
Database Audit
Remote DBA for PostgreSQL
Products
Postgres Pro Enterprise
Postgres Pro Standard
Cloud Solutions
Postgres Extensions
Resources
Blog
Documentation
Webinars
Videos
Presentations
Community
Events
Training Courses
Books
Demo Database
Mailing List Archives
About
Leadership team
Partners
Customers
In the News
Press Releases
Press Info
By continuing to browse this website, you agree to the use of cookies. Go to
Privacy Policy
.
I accept cookies