| From: | "Ryohei Takahashi (Fujitsu)" <r(dot)takahashi_2(at)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Vladlen Popolitov' <v(dot)popolitov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | 'Robert Haas' <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: COPY performance on Windows |
| Date: | 2024-12-16 12:10:03 |
| Message-ID: | TY3PR01MB118918628BBC8E31146927799823B2@TY3PR01MB11891.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Thank you for your interest in this thread.
> You could create database on RAM disk and make benchmarks.
According to your advice, I created RAM disk and put input files and data directory on RAM disk.
But the result changed only a few seconds.
In this test case, the table is unlogged table and shared_buffers is enough.
So, I think the disk performance does not affect so much.
> P.S. Could you point where is the performance measurement script you
> mantioned in you email?
> I will try to play with it.
Thank you.
Please use the "test.sh" in the following e-mail.
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/TY3PR01MB11891C0FD066F069B113A2376823E2%40TY3PR01MB11891.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com#8455c9f7b66780a356511f5cfe029d57
Regards,
Ryohei Takahashi
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker | 2024-12-16 12:26:38 | Re: pg_combinebackup PITR comparison test fix |
| Previous Message | Ryohei Takahashi (Fujitsu) | 2024-12-16 12:09:03 | RE: COPY performance on Windows |