Re: Improvement of checkpoint IO scheduler for stable transaction responses
От | KONDO Mitsumasa |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Improvement of checkpoint IO scheduler for stable transaction responses |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 51CBBA7A.8060509@lab.ntt.co.jp обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Improvement of checkpoint IO scheduler for stable transaction responses (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
(2013/06/26 20:15), Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 26.06.2013 11:37, KONDO Mitsumasa wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Heikki Linnakangas >>>>> Hmm, so the write patch doesn't do much, but the fsync patch makes >>>>> the response >>>>> times somewhat smoother. I'd suggest that we drop the write patch >>>>> for now, and focus on the fsyncs. >> >> Write patch is effective in TPS! > > Your test results don't agree with that. You got 3465.96 TPS with the write > patch, and 3474.62 and 3469.03 without it. The fsync+write combination got > slightly more TPS than just the fsync patch, but only by about 1%, and then the > response times were worse. Please see result of DBT-2 more careful. Average latency in fsync+write was improoved from only fsync patch. 90% tile and Maximum latency are not all of result but only part of result in DBT-2. And Average and TPS are all of result. Generally, when TPS become high in benchmark, checkpointer has to write more pages. Therefore, 90%tile and Maximum are worse in this case, and it is general in other benchmark tests. Best regards, -- Mitsumasa KONDO NTT Open Source Software Center
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: