Re: Performance regression on CVS head
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance regression on CVS head |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46692ACA.6040802@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance regression on CVS head (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance regression on CVS head
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes: >> I tried to repeat the DBT-2 runs with the "oldestxmin refresh" patch, >> but to my surprise the baseline run with CVS head, without the patch, >> behaved very differently than it did back in March. > >> I rerun the a shorter 1h test with CVS head from May 20th, and March 6th >> (which is when I ran the earlier tests), and something has clearly been >> changed between those dates that affects the test. Test run 248 is with >> CVS checkout from May 20th, and 249 is from March 6th: > > May 20th is not quite my idea of "HEAD" ;-). It might be worth checking > current code before investing any think-time on this. But having said > that, it looks a bit like a planner problem --- if I'm reading the > graphs correctly, I/O wait time goes through the roof, suggesting a > change to a much less efficient plan. I tracked this down to the patch to enable plan invalidation for SPI plans: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-03/msg00136.php Apparently the vacuum causes a plan invalidation and a worse plan is chosen. I'll dig deeper into which queries are being affected and why. Unless someone has any better ideas. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: