Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

2.4 v/s 2.6 again.

From: Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>
To: pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: 2.4 v/s 2.6 again.
Date: 2003-08-29 16:29:14
Message-ID: 200308292159.14095.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance
Hi all,

I compared 2.6 with elevator=deadline. It did bring some improvement in 
performance. But still it does not beat 2.4.

Attached are three files for details.

I also ran a simple insert benchmark to insert a million record in a simple 
table with a small int and a varchar(30). 

Here are the results

2.6 deadline
1K/xact		299sec
10K/xact		277 sec
100K/xact		271 sec

2.6 AS
1K/xact		262sec
10K/xact		Not done
100K/xact		257 sec

2.6 AS
1K/xact		252sec
10K/xact		243 sec
100K/xact		246 sec

It seems that I noted a test result wrongly. I need to do it again.

Overall 2.6 needs some real IO improvements. Of course it could do better on 
multiway machine.

I guess there is no point bothering  this with kernel hackers. They know this 
stuff already, right.

Looking forward to next release of kernel and hope it improves things...

 Shridhar

Attachment: pgbench.7.4CVSHEAD.24.20
Description: text/plain (2.4 KB)
Attachment: pgbench.7.4CVSHEAD.2.6.0-test4.deadline
Description: text/plain (1.3 KB)
Attachment: pgbench.7.4CVSHEAD.2.6.0-test4
Description: text/plain (2.4 KB)

pgsql-performance by date

Next:From: William YuDate: 2003-08-29 16:33:51
Subject: Re: Hardware recommendations to scale to silly load
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-08-29 16:18:35
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL functions - text / varchar - havy performance

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group