Re: [HACKERS] kqueue - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Rui DeSousa
Subject Re: [HACKERS] kqueue
Date
Msg-id 38D69889-4F5D-440F-ADE9-ED0902F5D99C@crazybean.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] kqueue  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] kqueue  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers


On Jan 22, 2020, at 2:19 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:

I cannot see any improvement on either FreeBSD 12 or NetBSD 8.1,
either as to net TPS or as to CPU load.  If anything, the TPS
rate is a bit lower with the patch, though I'm not sure that
that effect is above the noise level.

It's certainly possible that to see any benefit you need stress
levels above what I can manage on the small box I've got these
OSes on.  Still, it'd be nice if a performance patch could show
some improved performance, before we take any portability risks
for it.


Tom,

Here is two charts comparing a patched and unpatched system.  These systems are very large and have just shy of thousand connections each with averages of 20 to 30 active queries concurrently running at times including hundreds if not thousand of queries hitting the database in rapid succession.  The effect is the unpatched system generates a lot of system load just handling idle connections where as the patched version is not impacted by idle sessions or sessions that have already received data.  





Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: Online checksums patch - once again
Next
From: Ranier Vilela
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Windows port, fix some resources leaks