Re: [HACKERS] Should we cacheline align PGXACT?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
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?  (Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Hi, Ashutosh!

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu.coek88@gmail.com> wrote:
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:

Предыдущее
От: Bernd Helmle
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] LWLock optimization for multicore Power machines
Следующее
От: Masahiko Sawada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] DROP SUBSCRIPTION and ROLLBACK