From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Kirkwood <mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Admission Control |
Date: | 2010-07-09 02:26:23 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTikjXl3YnBVW7mJiZ-kf5hdQewJxAzSsCc0T4gXR@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 10:21 PM, Mark Kirkwood
<mark(dot)kirkwood(at)catalyst(dot)net(dot)nz> wrote:
> Purely out of interest, since the old repo is still there, I had a quick
> look at measuring the overhead, using 8.4's pgbench to run two custom
> scripts: one consisting of a single 'SELECT 1', the other having 100 'SELECT
> 1' - the latter being probably the worst case scenario. Running 1,2,4,8
> clients and 1000-10000 tramsactions gives an overhead in the 5-8% range [1]
> (i.e transactions/s decrease by this amount with the scheduler turned on
> [2]). While a lot better than 30% (!) it is certainly higher than we'd like.
Isn't the point here to INCREASE throughput?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-07-09 02:36:13 | Re: patch (for 9.1) string functions |
Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2010-07-09 02:21:56 | Re: Admission Control |