I wrote: > it might be worthwhile to "zoom in" with more measurements, but haven't done that yet.
I've attached the script and image for 1 million / random / varying the mod by quarter-log intervals. Unfortunately I didn't get as good results as yesterday. Immediately going from mod 1 to mod 2, sort pushdown regresses sharply and stays regressed up until 10000. The tiebreaker patch helps but never removes the regression.
I suspect that I fat-fingered work_mem yesterday, so next I'll pick a badly-performing mod like 32, then range over work_mem and see if that explains anything, especially whether L3 effects are in fact more important in this workload.
From:
"wangw.fnst@fujitsu.com" Date: Subject:
Fix the description of GUC "max_locks_per_transaction" and "max_pred_locks_per_transaction" in guc_table.c
Есть вопросы? Напишите нам!
Соглашаюсь с условиями обработки персональных данных
✖
By continuing to browse this website, you agree to the use of cookies. Go to Privacy Policy.