| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: checkpoint patches |
| Date: | 2012-03-21 19:38:18 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYHj05K12ygHJRKmoShpvA7axRdq64Sk8sheX0YrL6fGA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 3:34 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> Robert,
>
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
>> Thoughts?
>
> It was my impression that these patches were much about improving
> overall tps and more about reducing latency spikes for specific
> transactions that get hit by a checkpoint happening at a bad time.
>
> Are there any reductions in max latency for these pgbench runs..?
> Assuming that's information you can get..
It looks like I neglected to record that information for the last set
of runs. But I can try another set of runs and gather that
information.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2012-03-21 21:34:58 | Re: lots of unused variable warnings in assert-free builds |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2012-03-21 19:34:45 | Re: checkpoint patches |