Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?
| От | Alexander Korotkov |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAPpHfducNwc8bXULb4aQ_E5EvMpWH+8OUzakoJe_Fb2dRDVM2A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT? (Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, Ashutosh!
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com> wrote:
------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
Following are the pgbench results for read-write workload, I got with pgxact-align-3 patch. The results are for 300 scale factor with 8GB of shared buffer i.e. when data fits into the shared buffer. For 1000 scale factor with 8GB shared buffer the test is still running, once it is completed I will share the results for that as well.
pgbench settings:
pgbench -i -s 300 postgres
pgbench -M prepared -c $thread -j $thread -T $time_for_reading postgres
where, time_for_reading = 30mins
non default GUC param:
shared_buffers=8GB
max_connections=300
pg_xlog is located in SSD.
Thank you for testing.
It seems that there is still regression. While padding was reduced from 116 bytes to 4 bytes, it makes me think that probably there is something wrong in testing methodology.
Are you doing re-initdb and pgbench -i before each run? I would ask you to do the both.
Also, if regression would still exist, let's change the order of versions. Thus, if you run master before patched version, I would ask you to run patched version before master.
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: