Re: Postgres Benchmark Results

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Gregory Stark
Тема Re: Postgres Benchmark Results
Дата
Msg-id 87lkfhl1xv.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Postgres Benchmark Results  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Ответы Re: Postgres Benchmark Results  (Greg Smith <gsmith@gregsmith.com>)
Список pgsql-performance
"Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:

> Scott Marlowe wrote:
>>
>> I thought you were limited to 250 or so COMMITS to disk per second, and
>> since >1 client can be committed at once, you could do greater than 250
>> tps, as long as you had >1 client providing input.  Or was I wrong?
>
> My impression is that you are correct in theory -- this is the "commit
> delay" feature.  But it seems that the feature does not work as well as
> one would like; and furthermore, it is disabled by default.

Even without commit delay a client will commit any pending WAL records when it
syncs the WAL. The clients waiting to commit their records will find it
already synced when they get woken up.

However as mentioned a while back in practice it doesn't work quite right and
you should expect to get 1/2 the expected performance. So even with 10 clients
you should expect to see 5*120 tps on a 7200 rpm drive and 5*250 tps on a
15kprm drive.

Heikki posted a patch that experimented with fixing this. Hopefully it'll be
fixed for 8.4.

--
  Gregory Stark
  EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com


В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: PFC
Дата:
Сообщение: Feature suggestion : FAST CLUSTER
Следующее
От: Gregory Stark
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Postgres Benchmark Results