On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm kind of interested by the > result, actually, as I had feared that the spinlock protecting > ProcArrayLock was going to be a bigger problem sooner.
I think this depends on how many connections you have. If you try to scale up your benchmark by having hundreds of connections then get O(n^2) increase in the time spent with the procarray locked. It sounds like they pinned the number of connections at the number of cores they had. That makes sense if they're intentionally driving a cpu-bound benchmark but it means they won't run into this problem. -- greg -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
