On 03/09/14 16:22, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have yet to collect data under varying loads, however I have
>>> collected performance data for 8GB shared buffers which shows
>>> reasonably good performance and scalability.
>>>
>>> I think the main part left for this patch is more data for various loads
>>> which I will share in next few days, however I think patch is ready for
>>> next round of review, so I will mark it as Needs Review.
>>
>> I have collected more data with the patch. I understand that you
>> have given more review comments due to which patch require
>> changes, however I think it will not effect the performance data
>> to a great extent and I have anyway taken the data, so sharing the
>> same.
>>
>>
>>> Performance Data:
>>> -------------------------------
>>>
>>> Configuration and Db Details
>>> IBM POWER-7 16 cores, 64 hardware threads
>>> RAM = 64GB
>>> Database Locale =C
>>> checkpoint_segments=256
>>> checkpoint_timeout =15min
>>> scale factor = 3000
>>> Client Count = number of concurrent sessions and threads (ex. -c 8 -j 8)
>>> Duration of each individual run = 5mins
>>>
>>> All the data is in tps and taken using pgbench read-only load
>>
>> Common configuration remains same as above.
>
> Forgot to mention that data is a median of 3 runs and attached
> sheet contains data for individual runs.
>
>
Hi Amit,
Results look pretty good. Does it help in the read-write case too?
Cheers
Mark
