Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Metin Doslu <metin(at)citusdata(dot)com>
Cc: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Claudio Freire <klaussfreire(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers
Date: 2013-12-05 15:52:46
Message-ID: 20131205155246.GB3866@alap2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance

On 2013-12-05 17:46:44 +0200, Metin Doslu wrote:
> I tried your patches on next link. As you suspect I didn't see any
> improvements. I tested it on PostgreSQL 9.2 Stable.

You tested the correct branch, right? Which commit does "git rev-parse
HEAD" show?

But generally, as long as your profile hides all the important
information behind the hypervisor's cost, you're going to have a hard
time analyzing the problems. You really should try to reproduce the
problems on native hardware (as similar to the host hardware as
possible), to get accurate data. On CPU bound workloads that information
is often transportable to the virtual world.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2013-12-05 15:52:47 Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
Previous Message Metin Doslu 2013-12-05 15:46:44 Re: [HACKERS] Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Metin Doslu 2013-12-05 15:57:44 Re: Parallel Select query performance and shared buffers
Previous Message Scott Marlowe 2013-12-05 15:50:25 Re: WAL + SSD = slow inserts?