| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction |
| Date: | 2014-10-02 14:44:20 |
| Message-ID: | 20141002144420.GA25554@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-10-02 10:40:30 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:36 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> OK.
> >
> > Given that the results look good, do you plan to push this?
>
> By "this", you mean the increase in the number of buffer mapping
> partitions to 128, and a corresponding increase in MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS?
Yes. Now that I think about it I wonder if we shouldn't define MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS like
#define MAX_SIMUL_LWLOCKS (NUM_BUFFER_PARTITIONS + 64)
or something like that?
> If so, and if you don't have any reservations, yeah I'll go change it.
Yes, I'm happy with going forward.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2014-10-02 14:55:06 | Re: Inefficient barriers on solaris with sun cc |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2014-10-02 14:40:30 | Re: Scaling shared buffer eviction |