Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Keep elog(ERROR) and ereport(ERROR) calls in the cold path - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Keep elog(ERROR) and ereport(ERROR) calls in the cold path
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvo2N31OoA7KzF-t9w12TYVQkvGhK6juvO=6vyovQNoyPg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Keep elog(ERROR) and ereport(ERROR) calls in the cold path  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Keep elog(ERROR) and ereport(ERROR) calls in the cold path  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
Re: Keep elog(ERROR) and ereport(ERROR) calls in the cold path  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tree view 
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 at 19:08, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> I ran another scale=5 TPCH benchmark on v4 against f859c2ffa using gcc
> 9.3. I'm unable to see any gains with this, however, the results were
> pretty noisy. I only ran pgbench for 60 seconds per query. I'll likely
> need to run that a bit longer. I'll do that tonight.

I've attached the results of a TPCH scale=5 run master (f859c2ffa) vs
master + elog_ereport_attribute_cold_v4.patch

It does not look great. The patched version seems to have done about
1.17% less work than master did.

David
Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: new heapcheck contrib module
Next
From: "tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2