Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C28563461B for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:18:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 01306-03 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:18:12 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com (brmea-mail-4.Sun.COM [192.18.98.36]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04C83634179 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:18:15 -0300 (ADT) Received: from fe-amer-09.sun.com ([192.18.109.79]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id n2HDIDsd001960 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:18:13 GMT MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) id <0KGN00J00ISZK200@mail-amer.sun.com> for pgsql-performance@postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 07:18:13 -0600 (MDT) Received: from Macintosh-8.local ([unknown] [129.150.35.6]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7.0-5.01 64bit (built Feb 19 2009)) with ESMTPSA id <0KGN00DK3JMB9Z20@mail-amer.sun.com>; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 07:18:13 -0600 (MDT) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:18:11 -0400 From: "Jignesh K. Shah" Subject: Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4 In-reply-to: <1237225198.3963.60.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> To: Simon Riggs Cc: Tom Lane , Kevin Grittner , pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Message-id: <49BFA313.8040500@sun.com> References: <49B824DD.7090302@sun.com> <49B7F470.EE98.0025.0@wicourts.gov> <29080.1236821556@sss.pgh.pa.us> <49B87161.10201@sun.com> <1237225198.3963.60.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200903/230 X-Sequence-Number: 33152 Simon Riggs wrote: > On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 22:20 -0400, Jignesh K. Shah wrote: > > >> A tunable does not impact existing behavior >> > > Why not put the tunable parameter into the patch and then show the test > results with it in? If there is no overhead, we should then be able to > see that. > > Can do? Though will need quick primer on adding tunables. Is it on wiki.postgresql.org anywhere? -Jignesh -- Jignesh Shah http://blogs.sun.com/jkshah The New Sun Microsystems,Inc http://sun.com/postgresql