pá 3. 7. 2020 v 8:57 odesílatel Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com> napsal:
> > > On 2020/07/03 13:05, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > Hi > > > > pá 3. 7. 2020 v 4:39 odesílatel Fujii Masao <masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com > <mailto:masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com>> napsal: > > > > > > > > On 2020/07/01 7:37, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 6:40 AM Fujii Masao < > masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com <mailto:masao.fu...@oss.nttdata.com>> wrote: > > >> Ants and Andres suggested to replace the spinlock used in > pgss_store() with > > >> LWLock. I agreed with them and posted the POC patch doing that. > But I think > > >> the patch is an item for v14. The patch may address the reported > performance > > >> issue, but may cause other performance issues in other > workloads. We would > > >> need to measure how the patch affects the performance in various > workloads. > > >> It seems too late to do that at this stage of v13. Thought? > > > > > > I agree that it's too late for v13. > > > > Thanks for the comment! > > > > So I pushed the patch and changed default of track_planning to off. > > > > > > Maybe there can be documented so enabling this option can have a > negative impact on performance. > > Yes. What about adding either of the followings into the doc? > > Enabling this parameter may incur a noticeable performance penalty. > > or > > Enabling this parameter may incur a noticeable performance penalty, > especially when a fewer kinds of queries are executed on many > concurrent connections. > This second variant looks perfect for this case. Thank you Pavel > Regards, > > -- > Fujii Masao > Advanced Computing Technology Center > Research and Development Headquarters > NTT DATA CORPORATION >
