From: | Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Mithun Cy <mithun(dot)cy(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Perf Benchmarking and regression. |
Date: | 2016-05-13 11:08:51 |
Message-ID: | CAE9k0P=5Gzsp3yLVHEz=-t1JEPqPKzxgR29rQjAa-wU8+dhQ3A@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Following are the performance results for read write test observed with
different numbers of "*backend_flush_after*".
1) backend_flush_after = *256kb* (32*8kb), tps = *10841.178815*
2) backend_flush_after = *512kb* (64*8kb), tps = *11098.702707*
3) backend_flush_after = *1MB* (128*8kb), tps = *11434.964545*
4) backend_flush_after = *2MB* (256*8kb), tps = *13477.089417*
*Note:* Above test has been performed on Unpatched master with default
values for checkpoint_flush_after, bgwriter_flush_after
and wal_writer_flush_after.
With Regards,
Ashutosh Sharma
EnterpriseDB:* http://www.enterprisedb.com <http://www.enterprisedb.com>*
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2016-05-12 11:27:31 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:13 AM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
> wrote:
> > > Could you run this one with a number of different backend_flush_after
> > > settings? I'm suspsecting the primary issue is that the default is
> too low.
> >
> > What values do you think would be good to test? Maybe provide 3 or 4
> > suggested values to try?
>
> 0 (disabled), 16 (current default), 32, 64, 128, 256?
>
> I'm suspecting that only backend_flush_after_* has these negative
> performance implications at this point. One path is to increase that
> option's default value, another is to disable only backend guided
> flushing. And add a strong hint that if you care about predictable
> throughput you might want to enable it.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andres Freund
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2016-05-13 13:57:57 | Re: Error during restore - dump taken with pg_dumpall -c option |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-05-13 07:26:41 | Re: Error during restore - dump taken with pg_dumpall -c option |