Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-11 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > +1 for doing it now. Pushed. > You could possibly just move "inet macaddr macaddr8 " to the following > group and so have room for create_function_0. I just tried that and it > seemed happy. I decided that the minimum change would be to push tstypes to the following gro

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2021-05-11 10:57:03 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 8:52 AM Andres Freund wrote: > > ... If we did make the check support shared memory *and* > > partitioned tables, I could easily see it be a win for things like > > LockReleaseAll(). Errr, that's not even a shared ha

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Thomas Munro
On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 8:52 AM Andres Freund wrote: > ... If we did make the check support shared memory *and* > partitioned tables, I could easily see it be a win for things like > LockReleaseAll(). For that case, has the idea of maintaining a dlist of local locks been considered?

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2021-05-10 16:17:18 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I noticed that we already have counters that can tell whether a > catcache or dynahash table is empty, so I experimented with the > attached patch. Testing one of the slow queries from privileges.sql > (which might not be very representative of

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2021-05-10 14:06:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I wonder if there's anything we could do to make ResetCatalogCache >> faster? It wouldn't help much for normal execution of course, >> but it might do something to bring CCA testing time down out of >> the stratosphere. > W

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2021-05-10 14:06:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I wonder if there's anything we could do to make ResetCatalogCache >> faster? It wouldn't help much for normal execution of course, >> but it might do something to bring CCA testing time down out of >> the stratosphere. > W

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2021-05-10 14:06:16 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Hm. But constantly flushing the caches should mean that they're never > populated with very many entries at one time, which ought to forestall > that, at least to some extent. That's probably true... > I wonder if there's anything we could do

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Tom Lane
Andres Freund writes: > On 2021-05-08 15:44:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I was able to complete a bisection using just that test, and >> got an unexpected result: most of the slowdown appeared at >> ab596105b (BRIN minmax-multi indexes). Apparently the additional >> time is simply from having to

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-10 Thread Andres Freund
Hi, On 2021-05-08 15:44:57 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > In a nearby thread I bemoaned the fact that the core regression tests > seem to have gotten significantly slower in the last couple of months, > at least with CCA enabled: hyrax reports completing them in 12:52:44 > on 18 March, while its most re

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-09 Thread Julien Rouhaud
On Sun, May 09, 2021 at 01:01:38PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Julien Rouhaud writes: > > Looking at the patch, explicitly_binary_coercible wasn't used since > > e9f42d529f990f94e1b7bdcec4a465c85326 (and was renamed there too). Just > > to > > be sure, is it ok to remove it, as it was described

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-09 Thread Tom Lane
Julien Rouhaud writes: > Looking at the patch, explicitly_binary_coercible wasn't used since > e9f42d529f990f94e1b7bdcec4a465c85326 (and was renamed there too). Just to > be sure, is it ok to remove it, as it was described as >> --- We don't currently use this for any tests in this file, but

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-09 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 5/8/21 3:44 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Anyway, I propose that we ought to sneak this into HEAD, since > it's only touching test code and not anything production-critical. > > The patch is a bit more invasive than I would have liked, because > adding the SQL definition of binary_coercible() to creat

Re: Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-09 Thread Julien Rouhaud
On Sat, May 08, 2021 at 03:44:57PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I tried that, by adding a > shim function to regress.c, and got a most gratifying result: > on my machine opr_sanity's runtime with > debug_invalidate_system_caches_always = 1 drops from > 29m9s to 3m19s. Without CCA the speedup is far le

Reducing opr_sanity test's runtime under CLOBBER_CACHE_ALWAYS

2021-05-08 Thread Tom Lane
In a nearby thread I bemoaned the fact that the core regression tests seem to have gotten significantly slower in the last couple of months, at least with CCA enabled: hyrax reports completing them in 12:52:44 on 18 March, while its most recent run on 1 May took 14:08:18. Trying to diagnose the ca