Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
От | Alexander Korotkov |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAPpHfdu+bntYj2q=S4L1sR16q+5jD8Hmqun-6ZG-AThQdr118w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics (Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Move PinBuffer and UnpinBuffer to atomics
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Dilip!
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com> wrote:
------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:> 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
It seems like you did a copy-paste of the results with s=100 and
s=300. Both are showing the exact same numbers.Oops, my mistake, re-pasting the correct results for s=100
pgbench -i -s 100 postgres
pgbench -c$ -j$ -Mprepared -S postgres
Client Base Pached
1 20548 20791
32 372633 355356
64 532052 552148
128 412755 478826
256 346701 372057
Could you please re-run these tests few times?
Just to be sure it's a reproducible regression with s=300 and not a statistical error.
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: