Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Stephen Frost" <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: "Ivan Voras" <ivoras(at)freebsd(dot)org>, <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] MIT benchmarks pgsql multicore (up to 48)performance
Date: 2010-10-07 17:21:21
Message-ID: 4CADBB410200002500036644@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> perhaps it would be possible by, say, increasing the number of
> lock partitions by 8x. It would be nice to segregate these issues
> though, because using pread/pwrite is probably a lot less work
> than rewriting our lock manager.

You mean easier than changing this 4 to a 7?:

#define LOG2_NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS 4

Or am I missing something?

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2010-10-07 17:22:15 Re: Issues with Quorum Commit
Previous Message A.M. 2010-10-07 17:19:33 Re: O_DSYNC broken on MacOS X?

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Aaron Turner 2010-10-07 17:47:54 large dataset with write vs read clients
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2010-10-07 17:16:36 Re: Runtime dependency from size of a bytea field