Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes
Date
Msg-id Zd1M9Zi0W0oBbdvf@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Printing backtrace of postgres processes  (Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 04:05:05PM +0100, Christoph Berg wrote:
> I tried that now. Mind that I'm not a benchmarking expert, and there's
> been quite some jitter in the results, but I think there's a clear
> trend.
>
> Even if we regard the 1873 as an outlier, I've seen many vanilla runs
> with 22xx tps, and not a single v28 run with 22xx tps. Other numbers I
> collected suggested a cost of at least 3% for the feature.

Thanks for the numbers.  Yes, that's annoying and I suspect could be
noticeable for a lot of users..
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Better error messages for %TYPE and %ROWTYPE in plpgsql
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: Fix incorrect PG_GETARG in pgcrypto