Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention
Date
Msg-id CANP8+jLFNZ2m+k0MXa3pt19H5UBDkaQpNPqUhRp9Sd35p7McgA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 1 July 2015 at 11:11, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>
> On 1 July 2015 at 09:00, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I think it will be better to partition it or use it in some other way to avoid
>> two concurrent writers block at it, however if you want to first see the
>> test results with this, then that is also okay.
>
>
> Many updates would be on same page, so partitioning it would need to be at least 4-way to be worth doing. Maybe we could stripe into 512 bye pages.
>

Sure, it makes sense to try that way, once you have that ready, I can
try this out along with ProcArrayLock patch to see the impact.

Seems sensible to measure what the new point of contention is with both before doing anything further. 

--
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: Reducing ClogControlLock contention