Results of testing WAL
От | Mikheev, Vadim |
---|---|
Тема | Results of testing WAL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D316B@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: Results of testing WAL
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I've run some tests with 7.1 + WAL & 7.0.2 Setup: 5 tables (i int, t text), 100000 records in each table, sizeof(t column) is rand(256), indices on i column for all tables. -B 16384 -A 0 (+ --wal_buffers=256 in 7.1) System: SUN Ultra 10, 512M RAM, 1 (fast) IDE disk Test: 5 clients simultaneously performed UPDATE tableN SET t = '...rand(256) chars...' WHERE i = ...rand(100000)...; Each UPDATE was in separate transaction, client N changed tableN only, each client made 1000 transactions. Results: 5000 transactions took ~60 sec in 7.1, ~550 sec in 7.0.2 with fsync and ~60 sec without fsync. So, seems that WAL added not just complexity to system -:) I'm going to commit redo for sequences tomorrow evening and #define XLOG by default after this (initdb will be required). Vadim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: