Re: checkpointer continuous flushing
От | Tomas Vondra |
---|---|
Тема | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing |
Дата | |
Msg-id | b1a3c958-a2b6-bda5-e80c-0aed3c129654@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: checkpointer continuous flushing (Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr>) |
Ответы |
Re: checkpointer continuous flushing
Re: checkpointer continuous flushing |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 03/22/2016 10:44 AM, Fabien COELHO wrote: > > >>>> 1) regular-latency.png >>> >>> I'm wondering whether it would be clearer if the percentiles >>> where relative to the largest sample, not to itself, so that the >>> figures from the largest one would still be between 0 and 1, but >>> the other (unpatched) one would go between 0 and 0.85, that is >>> would be cut short proportionnaly to the actual performance. >> >> I'm not sure what you mean by 'relative to largest sample'? > > You took 5% of the tx on two 12 hours runs, totaling say 85M tx on > one and 100M tx on the other, so you get 4.25M tx from the first and > 5M from the second. OK > I'm saying that the percentile should be computed on the largest one > (5M), so that you get a curve like the following, with both curve > having the same transaction density on the y axis, so the second one > does not go up to the top, reflecting that in this case less > transactions where processed. Huh, that seems weird. That's not how percentiles or CDFs work, and I don't quite understand what would that tell us. regards -- Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: