Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData()
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYVdqPwsY_VpQoP4O2ZtQJ2-AOfJ1oMnK5Gi2EbMqE=BQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData() (Mithun Cy <mithun.cy@enterprisedb.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData()
Re: POC: Cache data in GetSnapshotData() |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 4:40 AM, Mithun Cy <mithun.cy@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
--
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Mithun Cy <mithun.cy@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> I will continue to benchmark above tests with much wider range of clients.Latest Benchmarking shows following results for unlogged tables.
clients BASE ONLY CLOG CHANGES % Increase CLOG CHANGES + SAVE SNAPSHOT % Increase 1 1198.326337 1328.069656 10.8270439357 1234.078342 2.9834948875 32 37455.181727 38295.250519 2.2428640131 41023.126293 9.5259037641 64 48838.016451 50675.845885 3.7631123611 51662.814319 5.7840143259 88 36878.187766 53173.577363 44.1870671639 56025.454917 51.9203038731 128 35901.537773 52026.024098 44.9130798434 53864.486733 50.0339263281 256 28130.354402 46793.134156 66.3439197647 46817.04602 66.4289235427
Whoa. At 64 clients, we're hardly getting any benefit, but then by 88 clients, we're getting a huge benefit. I wonder why there's that sharp change there.
--
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: