Re: Possible performance regression in version 10.1 with pgbench read-write tests.

From: Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Possible performance regression in version 10.1 with pgbench read-write tests.
Date: 2018-01-24 05:21:32
Message-ID: CAD__OuihDmp0ixbpRLwaLeabYtdFdh=P6CsNv7rWAgRQKzmc3Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 7:36 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> Both the cases look identical, but from the document attached, it
> seems the case-1 is for scale factor 300.

Oops sorry it was a typo. CASE 1 is scale factor 300 which will fit in
shared buffer =8GB.

--
Thanks and Regards
Mithun C Y
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2018-01-24 05:38:54 Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2018-01-24 05:08:51 Re: [HACKERS] parallel.c oblivion of worker-startup failures