From: | Krunal Bauskar <krunalbauskar(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM. |
Date: | 2020-11-26 05:14:41 |
Message-ID: | CAB10pyYiPQeabqbK7jqOOfJqJqsDq84hFBzCFfUwJtABjsDL2A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
scalability baseline patched
----------- --------- ----------
update tpcb update tpcb
--------------------------------------------------------------
128 107932 78554 108081 78569
256 82877 64682 101543 73774
512 55174 46494 77886 61105
1024 32267 27020 33170 30597
configuration:
https://github.com/mysqlonarm/benchmark-suites/blob/master/pgsql-pbench/conf/pgsql.cnf/postgresql.conf
On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 at 10:36, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 10:00:50AM +0530, Krunal Bauskar wrote:
> > (Thanks to Amit Khandekar for rigorously performance testing this patch
> > with different combinations).
>
> For the simple-update and tpcb-like graphs, do you have any actual
> numbers to share between 128 and 1024 connections? The blue lines
> look like they are missing some measurements in-between, so it is hard
> to tell if this is an actual improvement or just some lack of data.
> --
> Michael
>
--
Regards,
Krunal Bauskar
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2020-11-26 05:20:32 | Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM. |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2020-11-26 05:06:15 | Re: Improving spin-lock implementation on ARM. |