Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for CSN based snapshots
От | Michael Paquier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for CSN based snapshots |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAB7nPqQYh6zEeJ9PWMsNvdRC9rj=Q8XKw6Ew1VCLiun1=aUo-Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for CSN based snapshots (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for CSN based snapshots
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: > And here are the results on the 72 core machine (thanks again, Alexander!). > The test setup was the same as on the 32-core machine, except that I ran it > with more clients since the system has more CPU cores. In summary, in the > best case, the patch increases throughput by about 10%. That peak is with 64 > clients. Interestingly, as the number of clients increases further, the gain > evaporates, and the CSN version actually performs worse than unpatched > master. I don't know why that is. One theory that by eliminating one > bottleneck, we're now hitting another bottleneck which doesn't degrade as > gracefully when there's contention. > > Full results are available at > https://hlinnaka.iki.fi/temp/csn-4-72core-results/. There has not been much activity on this thread for some time, and I mentioned my intentions to some developers at the last PGCon. But I am planning to study more the work that has been done here, with as envisaged goal to present a patch for the first CF of PG11. Lots of fun ahead. -- Michael
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: