Re: Relation extension scalability
| От | Dilip Kumar |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Relation extension scalability |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAFiTN-t=wrVREMJp=h_6NGXrbKT89XP+aoAtjELH3TFwKQL3LA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Relation extension scalability (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Relation extension scalability
Re: Relation extension scalability |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, that makes sense. One more point is that if the reason for v13 giving better performance is extra blocks (which we believe in certain cases can leak till the time Vacuum updates the FSM tree), do you think it makes sense to once test by increasing lockWaiters * 20 limit to may be lockWaiters * 25 or lockWaiters * 30.
I tested COPY 10000 record, by increasing the number of blocks just to find out why we are not as good as V13
with extraBlocks = Min( lockWaiters * 40, 2048) and got below results..
COPY 10000
--------------------
Client Patch(extraBlocks = Min( lockWaiters * 40, 2048))
-------- ---------
16 752
32 708
This proves that main reason of v13 being better is its adding extra blocks without control.
though v13 is better than these results, I think we can get that also by changing multiplier and max limit .
But I think we are ok with the max size as 4MB (512 blocks) right?.
Does this test make sense ?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: