Re: Sync Rep and shutdown Re: Sync Rep v19 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Yeb Havinga
Subject Re: Sync Rep and shutdown Re: Sync Rep v19
Date
Msg-id AANLkTinYRqDU=zkJSPAy+f2BiYhNCX_NomtDRTBWNvA4@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Sync Rep and shutdown Re: Sync Rep v19  (Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Sync Rep and shutdown Re: Sync Rep v19
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2011-03-21 18:04, Robert Haas wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Yeb Havinga<yebhavinga@gmail.com>  wrote:
pgbench -i -s 50 test
Two runs of "pgbench -c 10 -M prepared -T 600 test" with 1 sync standby -
server configs etc were mailed upthread.

- performance as of commit e148443ddd95cd29edf4cc1de6188eb9cee029c5
1158 and 1306 (avg 1232)
- performance as of current git master
1181 and 1280 (avg 1230,5)
- performance as of current git master with
sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement applied
1152 and 1269 (avg 1210,5)


IMO what these tests have shown is that there is no 20% performance difference between the different versions. To determine if there are differences, n should be a lot higher, or perhaps a single one with a very large duration.

pgbench -T 3600:

sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement 1270 tps
current git master 1306 tps

--
Yeb Havinga
http://www.mgrid.net/
Mastering Medical Data


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Radosław Smogura
Date:
Subject: Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Planner regression in 9.1: min(x) cannot use partial index with NOT NULL