pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Васильев Дмитрий <d.vasilyev@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 13:41:20 -0500
Message-ID: <23665.1455216080@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoZk+ry4v5WB_n2fBQK2husZ9XjS1sGKMxohr-ebAidiWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20160114170604.GJ10941@awork2.anarazel.de>
	<CA+TgmoanS+7wpYZeX1C5Vp1XL56XK7f3mx1T+94QDN0_a+y3Jw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160114171421.GK10941@awork2.anarazel.de>
	<20160114172216.GL10941@awork2.anarazel.de>
	<8031.1452792493@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+Tgmobft858D8YHOMAUDY31d5Li1wt6p0-MvYeTVwo0UkoBqA@mail.gmail.com>
	<21927.1455212919@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+TgmoZZrb9SUjisMvy6sy08wrtqNzXvZBtcKkC5E6ZSy+rj3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160211175308.6er3o2oonzgxfvwp@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CA+TgmoaYuAbFviV2CvFkct9k3wGR+cVdyOMUnS=c=ZPG0aDD7w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160211181924.eacehhcpjn7s3xhc@alap3.anarazel.de>
	<CA+TgmoZk+ry4v5WB_n2fBQK2husZ9XjS1sGKMxohr-ebAidiWg@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>> Well, I can't do anything about that right now. I won't have the time to
>> whip up the new/more complex API we discussed upthread in the next few
>> days.  So either we go with a simpler API (e.g. pretty much a cleaned up
>> version of my earlier patch), revert the postmaster deatch check, or
>> somebody else has to take lead in renovating, or we wait...

> Well, I thought we could just revert the patch until you had time to
> deal with it, and then put it back in.  That seemed like a simple and
> practical option from here, and I don't think I quite understand why
> you and Tom don't like it.

Don't particularly want the git history churn, if we expect that the
patch will ship as-committed in 9.6.  If it becomes clear that the
performance fix is unlikely to happen, we can revert then.

If the performance change were an issue for a lot of testing, I'd agree
with a temporary revert, but I concur with Andres that it's not blocking
much.  Anybody who does have an issue there can revert locally, no?

			regards, tom lane


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers



view thread (93+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <23665.1455216080@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../23665.1455216080@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/23665.1455216080@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, d.vasilyev@postgrespro.ru
  Subject: Re: Performance degradation in commit ac1d794
  In-Reply-To: <23665.1455216080@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox