| From: | Mladen Gogala <gogala(dot)mladen(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-performance(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Catching up with performance & PostgreSQL 15 |
| Date: | 2022-11-30 00:44:23 |
| Message-ID: | bcd915ceb9bb65f1a4e00b673371071c63146a4f.camel@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
On Tue, 2022-11-29 at 19:09 +0100, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On 2022-Nov-29, Mladen Gogala wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, I think I will run pgbench with and without JIT on and see
> > the
> > difference.
>
> I doubt you'll notice anything, because the pgbench queries will be
> far
> below the JIT cost, so nothing will get JIT compiled at all. Or are
> you
> planning on using a custom set of queries?
>
Nope. I am planning to set jit_above_cost parameter to 5. That should
take care of the pgbench problem. Other than that, you're right: JIT
should not be used for OLTP. However, pure OLTP or DW databases are a
rarity these days. Reporting is a crucial function and almost every
OLTP database that I've seen also has reporting function, which means
that there are complex queries to be executed.
--
Mladen Gogala
Database Consultant
https://dbwhisperer.wordpress.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-11-30 11:47:32 | Re: Catching up with performance & PostgreSQL 15 |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2022-11-29 21:06:40 | Re: Catching up with performance & PostgreSQL 15 |