Re: BUG #17185: PostgreSQL performance GNU vs LLVM - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From arjun shetty
Subject Re: BUG #17185: PostgreSQL performance GNU vs LLVM
Date
Msg-id CAMowxTvotP+LW0iUgevU2pRbH0k8XQYTadP8c+m2SfzKPRu84Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to BUG #17185: PostgreSQL performance GNU vs LLVM  (PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>)
Responses Re: BUG #17185: PostgreSQL performance GNU vs LLVM
List pgsql-bugs
Hi All
I would like to know any comments or inputs #17185
I would like to know TPC-C performance GCC vs Clang(llvm).(# reference the below mail)

Best regards 
Arjun

On Wednesday, September 8, 2021, PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org> wrote:
The following bug has been logged on the website:

Bug reference:      17185
Logged by:          arjun shetty
Email address:      arjunshetty955@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 13.4
Operating system:   RHEL8.4
Description:       

TPCH Results(Query Response Time(Q1 to Q22):
-------------
VU      GCC    Clang         clang-with-llvm            Clang(make file code removed -flto
=thin to flto)         
vu                     
1       7185    6349    4410                            9984
2       7302    7352    4307                            9990
3       6233    6749    4544                            9698
4       6701    6328    3701                            10878
5       7105    7376    5829                            10991


Note: clang-with-llvm: JIT OFF.


TPCC Results(NOPM)
------------------
vu              GCC                   Clang     Clang-with-llvm             
Clang(make file code removed -flto =thin to flto(regluar flto)
16              921489          967234          946472                          963300
52              1655840         1779333         1683924                         1713926
68              1765030         1787377         1810060                         1835825
170             1894382         1986746         2034823                         1938886
192             1739617         1901906         1929656                         1912524
210             1610512         1801849         1674440                         1715523
230             1830690         1825760         1799097                         1708821

1.Regaular LTO not performs better than Thin LTO ? is regular LTO not
supported in postgresql?
2.Is specific reason need to use -flto=thin(clan13)?
3.TPCH(Clang-llvm)performs better than GCC/Clang(others) but why
TPCC(Clang-llvm) not performs better than GCC/Clang-other (performance
deviation is less)

the results captured in bare Metal(HP Environment) and benchmark Env
HammerDbv4.2

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17189: Index not created when primary key created
Next
From: "Euler Taveira"
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #17191: Docker / buildx issue - An image created with buildx requires to set custom PGDATA location