| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Speed up Clog Access by increasing CLOG buffers |
| Date: | 2016-04-07 04:46:16 |
| Message-ID: | 20160407044616.omi7tjqa2k763ppd@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2016-04-07 09:14:00 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I have ran exactly same test on intel x86 m/c and the results are as below:
Thanks for running these tests!
> Client Count/Patch_ver (tps) 2 128 256
> HEAD – Commit 2143f5e1 2832 35001 26756
> clog_buf_128 2909 50685 40998
> clog_buf_128 +group_update_clog_v8 2981 53043 50779
> clog_buf_128 +content_lock 2843 56261 54059
> clog_buf_128 +nocontent_lock 2630 56554 54429
Interesting.
could you perhaps also run a test with -btpcb-like(at)1 -bselect-only(at)3?
That much represents real world loads, and it's where I saw simon's
approach outshining yours considerably...
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-04-07 05:22:44 | Re: pg_ctl promote wait |
| Previous Message | Karl O. Pinc | 2016-04-07 04:37:09 | Re: Patch to implement pg_current_logfile() function |