Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Alexander Lakhin <exclusion(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, MARK CALLAGHAN <mdcallag(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16
Date: 2023-05-16 05:42:39
Message-ID: ZGMXzwtcQawbkIvs@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 05:54:53PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Yes. numactl --physcpubind ... in my case. Linux has an optimization where it
> does not need to send an IPI when the client and server are scheduled on the
> same core. For single threaded ping-pong tasks like pgbench -c1, that can make
> a huge difference, particularly on larger CPUs. So you get a lot better
> performance when forcing things to be colocated.

Yes, that's not bringing the numbers higher with the simple cases I
reported previously, either.

Anyway, even if I cannot see such a high difference, I don't see how
to bring back the original numbers you are reporting without doing
more inlining and tying COERCE_SQL_SYNTAX more tightly within the
executor's portions for the FuncExprs, and there are the collation
assumptions as well. Perhaps that's not the correct thing to do with
SQLValueFunction remaining around, but nothing can be done for v16, so
I am planning to just revert the change before beta1, and look at it
again later, from scratch.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Drouvot, Bertrand 2023-05-16 06:10:20 Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN
Previous Message Kirk Wolak 2023-05-16 05:38:32 Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN