From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com |
Cc: | amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, david(at)pgmasters(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru |
Subject: | Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress |
Date: | 2016-11-21 04:31:02 |
Message-ID: | 20161121.133102.152321709.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Thank you very much for the testing on the nice machine.
At Fri, 18 Nov 2016 20:35:43 -0800, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in <CAB7nPqRa=igQMCx+FxbfwJ0TzhLU2tE+YOng7qAvZ+1NPm-FOw(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Okay, I have done some performance tests with this patch and found that it doesn't have any noticeable impact which is good. Details of performance tests is below:
> > Machine configuration:
> > 2 sockets, 28 cores (56 including Hyper-Threading)
> > RAM = 64GB
> > Data directory is configured on the magnetic disk and WAL on SSD.
>
> Nice spec!
This spec seems enough to see the performance of this patch.
> > The conclusion from my tests is that this patch is okay as far as performance is concerned.
>
> Thank you a lot for doing those additional tests!
So, all my original concern were cleared. The last one is
resetting by a checkpointer restart.. I'd like to remove that if
Andres agrees.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2016-11-21 04:49:37 | Re: Tuple count used while costing MergeAppend and that for an append rel |
Previous Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2016-11-21 04:23:49 | Re: Document how to set up TAP tests for Perl 5.8.8 |