Re: pgbench vs. wait events - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: pgbench vs. wait events
Date
Msg-id 20161010134444.GA24183@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to pgbench vs. wait events  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: pgbench vs. wait events  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Oct  6, 2016 at 02:38:56PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I decided to do some testing on hydra (IBM-provided community
> resource, POWER, 16 cores/64 threads, kernel 3.2.6-3.fc16.ppc64) using
> the newly-enhanced wait event stuff to try to get an idea of what
> we're waiting for during pgbench.  I did 30-minute pgbench runs with
> various configurations, but all had max_connections = 200,
> shared_buffers = 8GB, maintenance_work_mem = 4GB, synchronous_commit =
> off, checkpoint_timeout = 15min, checkpoint_completion_target = 0.9,
> log_line_prefix = '%t [%p] ', max_wal_size = 40GB, log_checkpoints =
> on.  During each run, I ran this psql script in another window and
> captured the output:

This is a great study that shows how the new instrumentation has given
us a new window into performance.  I am frankly surprised we got as far
as we did in finding performance bottlenecks before we had this
instrumentation.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Artur Zakirov
Date:
Subject: FTS Configuration option
Next
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: cygwin64 assertion failure