Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: Spinlocks, yet again: analysis and proposed patches
Date: 2005-09-14 16:19:35
Message-ID: 20050914161935.GR6026@ns.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom, et al.,

Updated, with full recompiles between everything and the new
modification:

N, runtime:
Tip: 1 31s 2 37s 4 86s 8 159s
no-cmpb: 1 32s 2 43s 4 83s 8 168s
spin: 1 32s 2 51s 4 84s 8 160s
spin+mod: 1 32s 2 51s 4 89s 8 158s
spin+no-cmpb: 1 32s 2 51s 4 87s 8 163s
spin+mod+no-cmpb: 1 32s 2 50s 4 86s 8 161s

Unfortunately, the results don't seem to be terribly consistent between
runs anyway:

Run 2:
Tip: 1 32s 2 43s 4 87s 8 160s
no-cmpb: 1 31s 2 47s 4 83s 8 167s
spin: 1 32s 2 52s 4 88s 8 154s
spin+no-cmpb: 1 32s 2 51s 4 102s 8 166s
spin+mod: 1 32s 2 53s 4 85s 8 154s
spin+mod+no-cmpb: 1 32s 2 51s 4 91s 8 161s

Hope it helps,

Stephen

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jonah H. Harris 2005-09-14 16:36:37 Re: About method of PostgreSQL's Optimizer
Previous Message Pryscila B Guttoski 2005-09-14 15:52:50 Re: About method of PostgreSQL's Optimizer