On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Rafia Sabih
<rafia.sabih@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Thomas Munro
> <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Thomas Munro
>> <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> > But... what you said above must be a problem for Windows. I believe
>> > it doesn't allow files to be unlinked if they are open, and I see that
>> > DSM segments are cleaned up in resowner's phase ==
>> > RESOURCE_RELEASE_BEFORE_LOCKS and files are closed in phase ==
>> > RESOURCE_RELEASE_AFTER_LOCKS.
>>
>> I thought this last point about Windows might be fatal to my design,
>> but it seems that Windows since at least version 2000 has support for
>> Unixoid unlinkability via the special flag FILE_SHARE_DELETE.
>
> On testing v10 of this patch over commit
> b54aad8e34bd6299093e965c50f4a23da96d7cc3 and applying the tweak
> mentioned in [1], for TPC-H queries I found the results quite
> encouraging,
>
> Experimental setup:
> TPC-H scale factor - 20
> work_mem = 1GB
> shared_buffers = 10GB
> effective_cache_size = 10GB
> random_page_cost = seq_page_cost = 0.1
> max_parallel_workers_per_gather = 4
>
> Performance numbers:
> (Time in seconds)
> Query | Head | Patch |
> -------------------------------
> Q3 | 73 | 37 |
> Q5 | 56 | 31 |
> Q7 | 40 | 30 |
> Q8 | 8 | 8 |
> Q9 | 85 | 42 |
> Q10 | 86 | 46 |
> Q14 | 11 | 6 |
> Q16 | 32 | 11 |
> Q21 | 53 | 56 |
>
> Please find the attached file for the explain analyse output of these
> queries on head as well as patch.
> Would be working on analysing the performance of this patch on 300 scale factor.
>
> [1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEepm%3D270ze2hVxWkJw-5eKzc3AB4C9KpH3L2kih75R5pdSogg%40mail.gmail.com
> --
Before moving to higher scale I tried playing around work_mem effects
on this patch and came across following results,
All settings are kept as before with the exception of work_mem that is
set to 64MB.
Most of the queries showed similar performance except a few, details
are as follows,
(all time are given in ms)
Query | Head | Patch
---------+----------+--------
Q8 | 8720 | 8839
Q18 | 370710 | 384347
Q21 | 53270 | 65189
Clearly, regression in Q8 and Q18 is minor but that in Q21 is
significant. Just to confirm, I have applied the tweak mentioned in
[1] as before,
For the explain analyse output of Q21 on head and with patch, please
check the attached file.
[1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAEepm%3D270ze2hVxWkJw-5eKzc3AB4C9KpH3L2kih75R5pdSogg%40mail.gmail.com
--
Regards,
Rafia Sabih
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com/
