| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Saul, Jean Paolo" <paolo(dot)saul(at)verizonconnect(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Gierth <andrew(at)tao11(dot)riddles(dot)org(dot)uk>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: BUG #15609: synchronous_commit=off insert performance regression with secondary indexes |
| Date: | 2019-02-12 02:06:20 |
| Message-ID: | CAH2-WzkF0k8na5S=b6uhz9QA4Kr6E5POZ1QaktiMGjonmefGyA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 6:01 PM Saul, Jean Paolo
<paolo(dot)saul(at)verizonconnect(dot)com> wrote:
> Thanks for the tip Peter. Unfortunately it did not move the needle. Just curious what numbers are you getting when you are testing?
Well over 100k tps, usually ~150k tps, quite consistently (I need to
use -M prepared to get over 100k tps, though). I can see the progress
by using pgbench's -P option (e.g. -P 5 to see progress reports every
5 seconds), which is how I've determined that it's consistent. I am
using the master branch, but I can't think of any reason why it would
be different to v11.
I do have a fairly high end though still workstation grade SSD -- a
Samsung 970 PRO 512GB. I imagine that your server is at least as
powerful as my workstation by every measure, so this shouldn't matter.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2019-02-12 02:09:30 | Re: Re: BUG #15629: Typo in Documentation |
| Previous Message | Saul, Jean Paolo | 2019-02-12 02:00:56 | Re: BUG #15609: synchronous_commit=off insert performance regression with secondary indexes |