Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
От | Simon Riggs |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+U5nM+Smq3rMqPOUBg48-3oxcy4HWejroZOX8vYN31Ue=qLRA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation (Amit kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance Improvement by reducing WAL for Update Operation
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 11 January 2013 10:40, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> wrote: > Test results with original pgbench (synccommit off) on the latest patch: > > > -Patch- -tps@-c1- -WAL@-c1- -tps@-c2- -WAL@-c2- > Head 1459 1.40 GB 2491 1.70 GB > WAL modification 1558 1.38 GB 2441 1.59 GB > > > -Patch- -tps@-c4- -WAL@-c4- -tps@-c8- -WAL@-c8- > Head 5139 2.49 GB 10651 4.72 GB > WAL modification 5224 2.28 GB 11329 3.96 GB > There is slight performance dip in some of the cases for original pgbench. Is this just one run? Can we see 3 runs please? Can we investigate the performance dip at c=2? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: