Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZRnZmzQvKkBZZnRO=ecigG3dkO+uwZ-a-NNLF0yPR0QFg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition  (Christian Kruse <christian@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: Wait free LW_SHARED acquisition  (Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Christian Kruse
<christian@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Ok, benchmark for baseline+alignment patch is running.

I see that you have enabled latency information. For this kind of
thing I prefer to hack pgbench-tools to not collect this (i.e. to not
pass the "-l" flag, "Per-Transaction Logging"). Just remove it and
pgbench-tools rolls with it. It may well be that the overhead added is
completely insignificant, but for something like this, where the
latency information is unlikely to add any value, I prefer to not take
the chance. This is a fairly minor point, however, especially since
these are only 60 second runs where you're unlikely to accumulate
enough transaction latency information to notice any effect.


-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: GIN improvements part2: fast scan
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation