| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> | 
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18 | 
| Date: | 2016-02-22 15:57:55 | 
| Message-ID: | 20160222155755.dvt26dj3zu743ple@alap3.anarazel.de | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On 2016-02-22 14:11:05 +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> 
> >I did a quick & small test with random updates on 16 tables with
> >checkpoint_flush_after=16 checkpoint_timeout=30
> 
> Another run with more "normal" settings and over 1000 seconds, so less
> "quick & small" that the previous one.
> 
>  checkpoint_flush_after = 16
>  checkpoint_timeout = 5min # default
>  shared_buffers = 2GB # 1/8 of available memory
> 
> Random updates on 16 tables which total to 1.1GB of data, so this is in
> buffer, no significant "read" traffic.
> 
> (1) with 16 tablespaces (1 per table) on 1 disk : 680.0 tps
>     per second avg, stddev [ min q1 median d3 max ] <=300tps
>     679.6 ± 750.4 [0.0, 317.0, 371.0, 438.5, 2724.0] 19.5%
> 
> (2) with 1 tablespace on 1 disk : 956.0 tps
>     per second avg, stddev [ min q1 median d3 max ] <=300tps
>     956.2 ± 796.5 [3.0, 488.0, 583.0, 742.0, 2774.0] 2.1%
Interesting. That doesn't reflect my own tests, even on rotating media,
at all. I wonder if it's related to:
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=23d0127096cb91cb6d354bdc71bd88a7bae3a1d5
If you use your 12.04 kernel, that'd not be fixed. Which might be a
reason to do it as you suggest.
Could you share the exact details of that workload?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-02-22 16:05:20 | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing - V18 | 
| Previous Message | Oleksii Kliukin | 2016-02-22 15:39:57 | Re: WIP: Failover Slots |