From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
Date: | 2006-06-26 18:52:50 |
Message-ID: | 200606261852.k5QIqop14441@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> > IIRC, newer BSDen use a kernel call for this, so you should be able to
> > measure it on your own machine. Just tweak ps_status.c to force it to
> > select PS_USE_NONE instead of PS_USE_SETPROCTITLE to generate a
> > comparison case. I'll try it on my old HPUX box too.
>
> On HPUX, I get a median time of 5.59 sec for CVS HEAD vs 5.36 sec with
> ps_status diked out, for the test case of 10000 "SELECT 1;" as separate
> transactions, assert-disabled build. So, almost 10% overhead. Given
> that the transactions can't get any more trivial than this, that's about
> a worst-case number. Not sure if it's worth worrying about or not.
> However Kris Kennaway's report a couple weeks ago suggested things might
> be worse on BSD.
Yep, I see 8% here. I will add a patch to allow the ps display to be
turned off.
--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-26 18:54:56 | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-26 18:36:09 | Re: "Truncated" tuples for tuple hash tables |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-06-26 18:54:56 | Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2 |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-06-26 18:21:07 | Re: [PATCHES] Non-transactional pg_class, try 2 |