| From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics |
| Date: | 2016-03-02 04:41:33 |
| Message-ID: | CAFiTN-t6oeBVd2=zsxURZ65UJcxOaDRRc=RxLZDFyPGCWJ+oMw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> OK, I will test it, sometime in this week.
>
I have tested this patch in my laptop, and there i did not see any
regression at 1 client
Shared buffer 10GB, 5 mins run with pgbench, read-only test
base patch
run1 22187 24334
run2 26288 27440
run3 26306 27411
May be in a day or 2 I will test it in the same machine where I reported
the regression, and if regression is there I will check the instruction
using Call grind.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Amit Kapila | 2016-03-02 04:46:55 | Re: Patch: fix lock contention for HASHHDR.mutex |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2016-03-02 04:33:23 | Re: TAP / recovery-test fs-level backups, psql enhancements etc |