From: Jignesh K. Shah <J.K.Shah@Sun.COM>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>
Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:54:54 -0400
Message-ID: <49C0384E.2020707@sun.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1237330778.3953.139.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
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>
<49C01900.5030406@sun.com>
<1237330778.3953.139.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant>
Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 17:41 -0400, Jignesh K. Shah wrote:
>
>
>> I did a quick test with patch. Unfortunately it improves my number
>> even with default setting 0 (not sure whether I should be pleased or
>> sad - Definitely no overhead infact seems to help performance a bit.
>> NOTE: Logic is same, implementation is slightly different for default
>> set)
>>
>
> OK, I bite. 25% gain from doing nothing??? You're stretching my... err,
> credulity.
>
> I like the train of thought for setting 1 and it is worth investigating,
> but something feels wrong somewhere.
>
>
Actually I think I am hurting my credibility here since I cannot
explain the improvement with the patch but still using default logic
(thought different way I compare sequential using fields from the
previous proc structure instead of comparing with constant boolean)
But the change was necessary to allow it to handle multiple algorithms
and yet be sleek and not bloated.
In next couple of weeks I plan to test the patch on a different x64
based system to do a sanity testing on lower number of cores and also
try out other workloads ...
Regards,
Jignesh
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: J.K.Shah@Sun.COM, simon@2ndQuadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov
Subject: Re: Proposal of tunable fix for scalability of 8.4
In-Reply-To: <49C0384E.2020707@sun.com>
* 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