Re: Add PQsendSyncMessage() to libpq
От | Anton Kirilov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add PQsendSyncMessage() to libpq |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46201226-51a9-e261-fe54-efca5bab4a82@gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add PQsendSyncMessage() to libpq (Denis Laxalde <denis.laxalde@dalibo.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Add PQsendSyncMessage() to libpq
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, On 28/04/2023 09:08, Denis Laxalde wrote: > Michael Paquier a écrit : >> Speaking of which, what was the performance impact of your application >> once PQflush() was moved out of the pipeline sync? Just asking for >> curiosity.. > > I have no metrics for that; but maybe Anton has some? I did a quick check using the TechEmpower Framework Benchmarks ( https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/ ) - they define 4 Web application tests that are database-bound. Everything was running on a single machine, and 3 of the tests had an improvement of 29.16%, 32.30%, and 41.78% respectively in the number of requests per second (Web application requests, not database queries), while the last test regressed by 0.66% (which I would say is practically no difference, given that there is always some measurement noise). I will try to get the changes from my patch tested in the project's continuous benchmarking environment, which has a proper set up with 3 servers (client, application server, and database) connected by a 10GbE link. Best wishes, Anton Kirilov
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: