| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance |
| Date: | 2010-04-21 06:39:16 |
| Message-ID: | 1271831956.8305.26815.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 15:09 +1200, Mark Kirkwood wrote:
> I did some testing of this patch (v2). Unfortunately I don't have access
> to hardware capable of doing tests at the same scale as Erik used.
> However I was still able to show a consistent difference (I think)
> between standby performance with and without the patch applied.
...
> Overall looks like the patch gets standby read only performance close to
> the master - at least in the case where there are minimal master
> transactions being tracked by the standby (I had to leave the master
> idle whilst running the standby case, as they shared the machine). Hope
> this info is useful.
Thanks very much for the report; always good to get confirmation.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2010-04-21 06:50:50 | Re: Move tablespace |
| Previous Message | feng tian | 2010-04-21 05:03:10 | libpq connectoin redirect |