| From: | Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: postgres_fdw: commit remote (sub)transactions in parallel during pre-commit |
| Date: | 2021-11-07 09:13:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAPmGK14xQtN+Zg3-EUzO_--CBqjAyTh=LV4do9VjRQB2jWK7mw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:47 AM David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca> wrote:
> Followed your instructions, I performed some basic tests to compare the
> performance between before and after. In my testing environment (two
> foreign servers on the same local machine), the performance varies,
> sometimes the time spent on RELEASE and COMMIT without patch are close
> to after patched, but seems it always perform better after patched. Then
> I ran a 1-millions tuples insert, 5 times average is something like below,
>
> Before
> RELEASE 0.171 ms, COMMIT 1.861 ms
>
> After
> RELEASE 0.147 ms, COMMIT 1.305 ms
Good to know! Thanks for testing!
Best regards,
Etsuro Fujita
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2021-11-07 09:26:46 | Re: Commitfest 2021-11 Patch Triage - Part 1 |
| Previous Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2021-11-07 09:06:04 | Re: postgres_fdw: commit remote (sub)transactions in parallel during pre-commit |