Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup
| От | Asif Rehman |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CADM=JehhQpwgs9k-N7tdokAjrTH-RYaoBRSrGhxCtTdAWj6+xQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup
Re: WIP/PoC for parallel backup |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
I did some tests a while back, and here are the results. The tests were done to simulate
a live database environment using pgbench.
machine configuration used for this test:
Instance Type: t2.xlarge
Volume Type : io1
Memory (MiB) : 16384
vCPU # : 4
Architecture : X86_64
IOP : 16000
Database Size (GB) : 102
The setup consist of 3 machines.
- one for database instances
- one for pg_basebackup client and
- one for pgbench with some parallel workers, simulating SELECT loads.
basebackup | 4 workers | 8 Workers | 16 workers
Backup Duration(Min): 69.25 | 20.44 | 19.86 | 20.15
(pgbench running with 50 parallel client simulating SELECT load)
Backup Duration(Min): 154.75 | 49.28 | 45.27 | 20.35
(pgbench running with 100 parallel client simulating SELECT load)
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 9:27 AM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 8:07 PM Asif Rehman <asifr.rehman@gmail.com> wrote:--I forgot to make a check for no-manifest. Fixed. Attached is the updated patch.Have we done any performance testing with this patch to see the benefits? If so, can you point me to the results? If not, then can we perform some tests on large backups to see the benefits of this patch/idea?
--
Asif Rehman
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: