On Saturday 26 April 2008 13:26, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <xzilla@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> > On Friday 25 April 2008 17:32, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Robert Treat <xzilla@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >>> Oddly some dtrace profiling gave me this, which is pretty different,
> >>> but certainly doesn't have concerns about
> >>> TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId
> >>
> >> .... which seems to pretty much destroy your thesis, no?
> >
> > How so? Before the patch we bog down for hours, spending 99% of our
time
> > in TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId, after the patch everything
> > performs well (really better than before) and we spend so little time
in
> > TransactionIdIsCurrentTransactionId it barely shows up on the radar.
>
> Oh, you failed to state that the dtrace output was post-patch. You need
> to show *pre* patch dtrace output if you want us to think it relevant.
>
Please read up-thread.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
--
Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
|
