Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bkb9V-0003uT-KQ for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 18:12:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bkb9U-0008Rz-To for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 18:12:48 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bkb86-0006ut-JT for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 18:11:22 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bkb7z-0007fm-FN for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 18:11:21 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u8FIBBmq005807; Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:11:11 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Oskari Saarenmaa cc: Robert Haas , "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" Subject: Re: Use pread and pwrite instead of lseek + write and read In-reply-to: <6e2a5f2c-8f16-6711-717a-9c7cff45546f@ohmu.fi> References: <7109.1471441241@sss.pgh.pa.us> <6352.1471461075@sss.pgh.pa.us> <6e2a5f2c-8f16-6711-717a-9c7cff45546f@ohmu.fi> Comments: In-reply-to Oskari Saarenmaa message dated "Thu, 15 Sep 2016 09:55:47 +0300" Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:11:11 -0400 Message-ID: <5806.1473963071@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -4.2 (----) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org Oskari Saarenmaa writes: > 17.08.2016, 22:11, Tom Lane kirjoitti: >> I'd be more excited about this if the claimed improvement were more than >> 1.5%, but you know as well as I do that that's barely above the noise >> floor for most performance measurements. I'm left wondering why bother, >> and why take any risk of de-optimizing on some platforms. > I think it makes sense to try to optimize for the platforms that people > actually use for performance critical workloads, especially if it also > allows us to simplify the code and remove more lines than we add. It's > nice if the software still works on legacy platforms, but I don't think > we should be concerned about a hypothetical performance impact on > platforms no one uses in production anymore. Well, my point remains that I see little value in messing with long-established code if you can't demonstrate a benefit that's clearly above the noise level. We don't really know whether this change might have adverse impacts somewhere --- either performance-wise or bug-wise --- and for that amount of benefit I don't want to take the trouble to find out. 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