Re: kqueue

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Date: 2016-09-14T06:32:57Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> writes:
> From an OSX laptop with -S, -c 1 and -M prepared (9 runs, removed the
> three best and three worst):
> - HEAD: 9356/9343/9369
> - HEAD + patch: 9433/9413/9461.071168
> This laptop has a lot of I/O overhead... Still there is a slight
> improvement here as well. Looking at the progress report, per-second
> TPS gets easier more frequently into 9500~9600 TPS with the patch. So
> at least I am seeing something.

Which OSX version exactly?

			regards, tom lane


Commits

  1. Add kqueue(2) support to the WaitEventSet API.

  2. Add WL_EXIT_ON_PM_DEATH pseudo-event.

  3. Be conservative about alignment requirements of struct epoll_event.

  4. Make idle backends exit if the postmaster dies.