From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Anjan Dave" <adave(at)vantage(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Vivek Khera" <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>, "Postgresql Performance" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: High context switches occurring |
Date: | 2005-12-06 23:45:03 |
Message-ID: | 22673.1133912703@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
"Anjan Dave" <adave(at)vantage(dot)com> writes:
> -bash-3.00$ time pgbench -c 1000 -t 30 pgbench
> starting vacuum...end.
> transaction type: TPC-B (sort of)
> scaling factor: 1
> number of clients: 1000
> number of transactions per client: 30
> number of transactions actually processed: 30000/30000
> tps = 45.871234 (including connections establishing)
> tps = 46.092629 (excluding connections establishing)
I can hardly think of a worse way to run pgbench :-(. These numbers are
about meaningless, for two reasons:
1. You don't want number of clients (-c) much higher than scaling factor
(-s in the initialization step). The number of rows in the "branches"
table will equal -s, and since every transaction updates one
randomly-chosen "branches" row, you will be measuring mostly row-update
contention overhead if there's more concurrent transactions than there
are rows. In the case -s 1, which is what you've got here, there is no
actual concurrency at all --- all the transactions stack up on the
single branches row.
2. Running a small number of transactions per client means that
startup/shutdown transients overwhelm the steady-state data. You should
probably run at least a thousand transactions per client if you want
repeatable numbers.
Try something like "-s 10 -c 10 -t 3000" to get numbers reflecting test
conditions more like what the TPC council had in mind when they designed
this benchmark. I tend to repeat such a test 3 times to see if the
numbers are repeatable, and quote the middle TPS number as long as
they're not too far apart.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Stone | 2005-12-07 00:23:07 | Re: postgresql performance tuning |
Previous Message | Ameet Kini | 2005-12-06 22:03:22 | Re: postgresql performance tuning |