From: | "Jignesh K(dot) Shah" <J(dot)K(dot)Shah(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] 8.3beta1 testing on Solaris |
Date: | 2007-10-26 13:25:02 |
Message-ID: | 4721EAAE.3020801@sun.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
The problem I saw was first highlighted by EAStress runs with PostgreSQL
on Solaris with 120-150 users. I just replicated that via my smaller
internal benchmark that we use here to recreate that problem.
EAStress should be just fine to highlight it.. Just put pg_clog on
O_DIRECT or something so that all IOs go to disk making it easier to
observe.
In the meanwhile I will try to get more information.
Regards,
Jignesh
Tom Lane wrote:
> Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>
>> Didn't we already go through this? He and Simon were pushing to bump up
>> NUM_CLOG_BUFFERS and you were arguing that the test wasn't representative and
>> some other clog.c would have to be reengineered to scale well to larger
>> values.
>>
>
> AFAIR we never did get any clear explanation of what the test case is.
> I guess it must be write-mostly, else lazy XID assignment would have
> helped this by reducing the rate of XID consumption.
>
> It's still true that I'm leery of a large increase in the number of
> buffers without reengineering slru.c. That code was written on the
> assumption that there were few enough buffers that a linear search
> would be fine. I'd hold still for 16, or maybe even 32, but I dunno
> how much impact that will have for such a test case.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
> choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
> match
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jignesh K. Shah | 2007-10-26 13:36:53 | Re: [HACKERS] 8.3beta1 testing on Solaris |
Previous Message | Sebastien FLAESCH | 2007-10-26 13:23:49 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.3, libpq and WHERE CURRENT OF |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jignesh K. Shah | 2007-10-26 13:36:53 | Re: [HACKERS] 8.3beta1 testing on Solaris |
Previous Message | Jignesh K. Shah | 2007-10-26 13:20:36 | Re: 8.3beta1 testing on Solaris |