From: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Why is subscription/t/031_column_list.pl failing so much? |
Date: | 2024-02-06 12:38:55 |
Message-ID: | CAA4eK1Jd3kSG9RzZu9gCkBtcBcddK5zTs_CvWnV3hTtkX7wuvw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 2:30 PM Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 06.02.2024 09:48, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > cool, is it possible to see whether this patch changes the runtime of
> > this test in any noticeable way?
> >
>
> Yes, unfortunately it does.
> I've measured duration of 100 tests runs without the patch (with pristine
> bgwriter and with NO_TEMP_INSTALL):
> real 6m46,031s
> real 6m52,406s
> real 6m51,014s
>
> But with the patched test, I've got:
> real 9m39,872s
> real 9m40,044s
> real 9m38,236s
> (nearly 2 seconds increase per one test run)
>
> Under Valgrind, the original test run takes:
> Files=1, Tests=36, 334 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.00 sys + 163.14 cusr 7.98 csys = 171.14 CPU)
>
> But the patched one:
> Files=1, Tests=36, 368 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.00 sys + 182.16 cusr 8.90 csys = 191.08 CPU)
> (30 seconds increase)
>
Yeah, I was worried about that. The other idea I have previously
thought was to change Alter Subscription to Drop+Create Subscription.
That should also help in bringing stability without losing any
functionality.
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2024-02-06 12:51:38 | Re: Memory consumed by paths during partitionwise join planning |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2024-02-06 12:24:11 | Re: Synchronizing slots from primary to standby |