Re: Prefetch the next tuple's memory during seqscans - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Rowley
Subject Re: Prefetch the next tuple's memory during seqscans
Date
Msg-id CAApHDvomrfE0e+ct2gj+c=1z5J+8V2HNo4YOjARfN=PuyaTD=g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Prefetch the next tuple's memory during seqscans  (David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 at 10:58, David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> wrote:
> My current thoughts are that it might be best to go with 0005 to start
> with.  I know Melanie is working on making some changes in this area,
> so perhaps it's best to leave 0002 until that work is complete.

I tried running TPC-H @ scale 5 with master (@d09dbeb9) vs master +
0001 + 0005 patch. The results look quite promising.  Query 15 seems
to run 15% faster and overall it's 4.23% faster.

Full results are attached.

David

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais
Date:
Subject: Re: Transparent column encryption
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix for visibility check on 14.5 fails on tpcc with high concurrency