From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Do you know the reason for increased max latency due to xlog scaling? |
Date: | 2014-02-17 16:46:12 |
Message-ID: | 20140217164612.GH18388@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2014-02-18 01:35:52 +0900, MauMau wrote:
> From: "Andres Freund" <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> >On 2014-02-18 00:43:54 +0900, MauMau wrote:
> >>I'm worried about the big increase in max latency. Do you know the
> >>cause?
> >>More frequent checkpoints caused by increased WAL volume thanks to
> >>enhanced
> >>performance?
> >
> >I don't see much evidence of increased latency there? You can't really
> >compare the latency when the throughput is significantly different.
>
> For example, please see the max latencies of test set 2 (PG 9.3) and test
> set 4 (xlog scaling with padding). They are 207.359 and 1219.422
> respectively. The throughput is of course greatly improved, but I think the
> response time should not be sacrificed as much as possible. There are some
> users who are sensitive to max latency, such as stock exchange and online
> games.
You need to compare both at the same throughput to have any meaningful
comparison.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2014-02-17 16:51:34 | Re: Ctrl+C from sh can shut down daemonized PostgreSQL cluster |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-02-17 16:39:20 | Re: Decimal values in |