On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2011-03-20 05:44, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> Hmm, I'm not going to be able to reproduce this here, and my test >> setup didn't show a clear regression. I can try beating on it some >> more, but... Any chance you could rerun your test with the latest >> master-branch code, and perhaps also with the patch I proposed >> upthread to remove a branch from the section protection by >> SyncRepLock? I can't really tell from reading the emails you linked >> what was responsible for the slowdowns and speedups, and it is unclear >> to me how much impact my recent changes actually had. > > No problem. Could you tell me the name of the "remove a branch from the > section protection by SyncRepLock" ? patch, or perhaps a message-link? > Upthread I see sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement.patch but also two > sync-rep-wait-fixes.
Thanks! The things I'd like to see compared are: - performance as of commit e148443ddd95cd29edf4cc1de6188eb9cee029c5 - performance as of current git master - performance as of current git master with sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement applied -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
