Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
От | Dilip Kumar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFiTN-te2RQh11U-LjRqxAMY7-YcBi3HxHC+8+B+D32H7QHqKw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
I was looking into this patch, overall patch looks good to me, I want to
know what is the current state of this patch, is there some pending task in
this patch ?
Patch was not applying on head so i have re based it and re based version is
attached in the mail.
I have done some performance testing also..
Summary:
---------------
1. In my test for readonly workload i have observed some improvement for scale factor 1000.
2. I have also observed some regression with scale factor 300 (I can't say
it's actual regression or just run to run variance), I thought that may be problem with lower scale factor so tested with scale factor 100 but with s.f. 100 looks fine.
Non Default Parameter:
------------------------
Shared Buffer= 30GB
max_wal_size= 10GB
max_connections=500
Test1:
pgbench -i -s 1000 postgres
pgbench -c$ -j$ -Mprepared -S postgres
Client Base Pached
1 19753 19493
32 344059 336773
64 495708 540425
128 564358 685212
256 466562 639059
Test2:
pgbench -i -s 300 postgres
pgbench -c$ -j$ -Mprepared -S postgres
Client Base Pached
1 20555 19404
32 375919 332670
64 509067 440680
128 431346 415121
256 380926 379176
Test3:
pgbench -i -s 100 postgres
pgbench -c$ -j$ -Mprepared -S postgres
Client Base Pached
1 20555 19404
32 375919 332670
64 509067 440680
128 431346 415121
256 380926 379176
--
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
I was looking into this patch, overall patch looks good to me, I want to
know what is the current state of this patch, is there some pending task in
this patch ?
Patch was not applying on head so i have re based it and re based version is
attached in the mail.
I have done some performance testing also..
Summary:
---------------
1. In my test for readonly workload i have observed some improvement for scale factor 1000.
2. I have also observed some regression with scale factor 300 (I can't say
it's actual regression or just run to run variance), I thought that may be problem with lower scale factor so tested with scale factor 100 but with s.f. 100 looks fine.
Machine Detail:
cpu : POWER8
cpu : POWER8
cores: 24 (192 with HT)
Non Default Parameter:
------------------------
Shared Buffer= 30GB
max_wal_size= 10GB
max_connections=500
Test1:
pgbench -i -s 1000 postgres
pgbench -c$ -j$ -Mprepared -S postgres
Client Base Pached
1 19753 19493
32 344059 336773
64 495708 540425
128 564358 685212
256 466562 639059
Test2:
pgbench -i -s 300 postgres
pgbench -c$ -j$ -Mprepared -S postgres
Client Base Pached
1 20555 19404
32 375919 332670
64 509067 440680
128 431346 415121
256 380926 379176
Test3:
pgbench -i -s 100 postgres
pgbench -c$ -j$ -Mprepared -S postgres
Client Base Pached
1 20555 19404
32 375919 332670
64 509067 440680
128 431346 415121
256 380926 379176
--
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: