From: | "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: in-transaction insert performance in 7.5devel |
Date: | 2004-06-17 16:35:19 |
Message-ID: | 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB34101AE5E@Herge.rcsinc.local |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
> Was that 15% before or after updating from CVS?
>
> The more I think about the looping aspect the less I like it, so I'd
> prefer not to pursue making the unlock change for real. But if it's
> really a 15% win then maybe we need to...
>
> regards, tom lane
After. So far, I haven't been able to reproduce original the insert
problem. A word of warning: the version I was testing with was patched
with some unapproved patches and that may have been part of the issue.
Here are my results (10k drive, NTFS):
fsync off, in xact: ~ 398 i/sec
fsync off, outside xact: ~ 369 i/sec
fsync on, in xact: ~ 374 i/sec
fsync on, outside xact: ~ 35 i/sec
with your code change:
fsync on, in xact: ~ 465 i/sec
fsync on, outside xact: ~ 42 i/sec
Don't put too much faith in these results. If you are still
contemplating a code change, I'll set up a test unit for more accurate
results and post the code (my current tests are in COBOL).
Merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vitaly Belman | 2004-06-17 16:54:41 | Re: Visual Explain |
Previous Message | Jeff | 2004-06-17 13:37:29 | Re: Visual Explain |