Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kuntal Ghosh
Subject Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention
Date
Msg-id CAGz5QCLaStfnQJ335XA3zdbeKs=JpHBMqpM6X3e2Ujpxw-5iGA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention  (Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Tomas Vondra
<tomas.vondra@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> How do these counts compare to the other wait events? For example
> CLogControlLock, which is what Amit's patch [1] is about?
>
> [1]
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/84c22fbb-b9c4-a02f-384b-b4feb2c67193%402ndquadrant.com
>
Hello Tomas,

I'm really sorry for this late reply. I've somehow missed the thread.
Actually, I've seen some performance improvement with the
CLogControlLock patch. But, then it turned out all the improvements
were because of the CLogControlLock patch alone.


-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Kuntal Ghosh
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ASOF join
Next
From: Kuntal Ghosh
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] An attempt to reduce WALWriteLock contention