| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp |
| Cc: | ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp, coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr, masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, asifr(dot)rehman(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Fix around conn_duration in pgbench |
| Date: | 2021-08-31 05:46:42 |
| Message-ID: | 20210831.144642.1274071022283648525.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>> > My 0.02€: From a benchmarking perspective, ISTM that it makes sense to
>> > include disconnection times, which are clearly linked to connections,
>> > especially with -C. So I'd rather have the more meaningful figure even
>> > at the price of a small change in an undocumented feature.
>>
>> +1. The aim of -C is trying to measure connection overhead which
>> naturally includes disconnection overhead.
>
> I think it is better to measure disconnection delays when -C is specified in
> pg 14. This seems not necessary when -C is not specified because pgbench just
> reports "initial connection time".
Ok.
> However, what about pg13 or later? Do you think we should also change the
> behavior of pg13 or later? If so, should we measure disconnection delay even
> when -C is not specified in pg13?
You mean "pg13 or before"?
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2021-08-31 05:47:10 | Re: Failure of subscription tests with topminnow |
| Previous Message | Bossart, Nathan | 2021-08-31 05:37:52 | Re: Estimating HugePages Requirements? |