| From: | Zdenek Kotala <Zdenek(dot)Kotala(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
|---|---|
| To: | abbas(dot)butt(at)enterprisedb(dot)com |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [REVIEW] Prototype: In-place upgrade v02 |
| Date: | 2008-09-30 07:08:14 |
| Message-ID: | 48E1D05E.7020807@sun.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Abbas napsal(a):
> On Mon, 2008-09-29 at 14:42 +0200, Zdenek Kotala wrote:
>>
>>> Do I have to perform performance tests too?
>> Yes, please. My colleague tested it and got 5% performance drop, but it was not
>> complete version and I tested full patch on Friday and It was surprise for me
>> ... I got little bit better throughput (about 0,5%) with patch. I'm going to
>> retest it again but it would be good to get result also from others.
>
>
> Are there defined ways of benchmarking the current performance of pg
> database on my system?
> Are there any guide lines on what type of data or table design should be
> used?
I think integer, numeric, text and some composite type should be enough.
> One option of getting the benchmarks could be to use the run time
> statistics logging with and without the patch.
Run time statistic should be same. Patch add extra wrapper around page and
heaptuple processing. By my opinion pg_stat* output shouldn't show extra
difference.
> And I have to test the performance of the 4 basic queries INSERT,
> UPDATE, DELETE and SELECT, right?
>
Yes. It would be nice compare simple SELECT and complex SELECT too.
Thanks Zdenek
Zdenek Kotala Sun Microsystems
Prague, Czech Republic http://sun.com/postgresql
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2008-09-30 07:23:22 | Re: FSM rewrite: doc changes |
| Previous Message | Robins Tharakan | 2008-09-30 06:19:31 | Function management in PG |