Re: HOT pgbench results

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: ITAGAKI Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: HOT pgbench results
Date: 2007-08-14 07:27:57
Message-ID: 46C1597D.4090802@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thanks for the testing,

ITAGAKI Takahiro wrote:
> I gathered oprofile logs. There were 4 HOT-related functions, that didn't
> appear in the unpatched test. But it is probably not so serious.
> - heap_page_prune 1.84%
> - PageRepairFragmentation 0.94%
> - pg_qsort 0.44% (called from PageRepairFragmentation)

That's expected. Those functions are involved in removing the dead HOT
tuples, replacing VACUUMs. Maybe we could make them cheaper, but it's
not too bad as it is.

> On the other hand, the number of _bt_compare and _bt_checkkeys were
> reduced by HOT, because we avoid the most part of index insertions.
> It looks like LWLockAcquire/Release were also reduced, but I cannot
> assure it is a benefits of HOT or a measurement deviation.

It could very well be real. Because of the reduction of index
insertions, there's less locking of the index pages.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavan Deolasee 2007-08-14 07:44:42 Re: HOT patch, missing things
Previous Message ITAGAKI Takahiro 2007-08-14 07:22:25 Re: HOT pgbench results