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

Re: pgbench transaction timestamps

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Greg Smith <gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pgbench transaction timestamps
Date: 2007-04-02 21:18:57
Message-ID: 200704022118.l32LIvA16108@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:

	http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches

It will be applied as soon as one of the PostgreSQL committers reviews
and approves it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Greg Smith wrote:
> This patch changes the way pgbench outputs its latency log files so that 
> every transaction gets a timestamp and notes which transaction type was 
> executed.  It's a one-line change that just dumps some additional 
> information that was already sitting in that area of code. I also made a 
> couple of documentation corrections and clarifications on some of the more 
> confusing features of pgbench.
> 
> It's straightforward to parse log files in this format to analyze what 
> happened during the test at a higher level than was possible with the 
> original format.  You can find some rough sample code to convert this 
> latency format into CVS files and then into graphs at 
> http://www.westnet.com/~gsmith/content/postgresql/pgbench.htm which I'll 
> be expanding on once I get all my little patches sent in here.
> 
> If you recall the earlier version of this patch I submitted, it added a 
> cleanup feature that did a vacuum and checkpoint after the test was 
> finished and reported two TPS results.  The idea was to quantify how much 
> of a hit the eventual table maintenance required to clean up after the 
> test would take.  While those things do influence results and cause some 
> of the run-to-run variation in TPS (checkpoints are particularly visible 
> in the graphs), after further testing I concluded running a VACUUM VERBOSE 
> and CHECKPOINT in a script afterwards and analyzing the results was more 
> useful than integrating something into pgbench itself.
> 
> --
> * Greg Smith gsmith(at)gregsmith(dot)com http://www.gregsmith.com Baltimore, MD
Content-Description: 

[ Attachment, skipping... ]

> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>          http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                               http://www.enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-02 21:19:58
Subject: Re: Is this portable?
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2007-04-02 21:16:37
Subject: Re: Questions about pid file creation code

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2007-04-02 21:27:30
Subject: Re: Current enums patch
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-04-02 21:16:28
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Full page writes improvement, code update

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