Re: undetected deadlock in ALTER SUBSCRIPTION ... REFRESH PUBLICATION
Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@enterprisedb.com>
To: Shlok Kyal <shlok.kyal.oss@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>,
PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-12-05T11:48:31Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 12/5/23 08:14, Shlok Kyal wrote: > Hi, > >> As for the test results, I very much doubt the differences are not >> caused simply by random timing variations, or something like that. And I >> don't understand what "Performance Machine Linux" is, considering those >> timings are slower than the other two machines. > > The machine has Total Memory of 755.536 GB, 120 CPUs and RHEL 7 Operating System > Also find the detailed info of the performance machine attached. > Thanks for the info. I don't think the tests really benefit from this much resources, I would be rather surprised if it was faster beyond 8 cores or so. The CPU frequency likely matters much more. Which probably explains why this machine was the slowest. Also, I wonder how much the results vary between the runs. I suppose you only did s single run for each, right? regards -- Tomas Vondra EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Commits
-
Fix an undetected deadlock due to apply worker.
- 8d7d2197f31c 17.0 landed
- 01cc92fa6251 16.2 landed
- 332b43063351 15.6 landed
- 3f86867d560f 14.11 landed
- b47ea4f3d305 13.14 landed
- e81e617f3273 12.18 landed