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
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 |