Re: Sync Rep and shutdown Re: Sync Rep v19

On 2011-03-21 23:58, Yeb Havinga wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com>> wrote:
>
> On 2011-03-21 18:04, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Yeb
> Havinga<yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com <mailto:yebhavinga(at)gmail(dot)com>>
> wrote:
>
> pgbench -i -s 50 test
> Two runs of "pgbench -c 10 -M prepared -T 600 test" with 1
> sync standby -
> server configs etc were mailed upthread.
>
> - performance as of commit
> e148443ddd95cd29edf4cc1de6188eb9cee029c5
>
> 1158 and 1306 (avg 1232)
>
> - performance as of current git master
>
> 1181 and 1280 (avg 1230,5)
>
> - performance as of current git master with
> sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement applied
>
> 1152 and 1269 (avg 1210,5)
>
>
>
> IMO what these tests have shown is that there is no 20%
> performance difference between the different versions. To
> determine if there are differences, n should be a lot higher, or
> perhaps a single one with a very large duration.
>
>
> pgbench -T 3600:
>
> sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement 1270 tps
> current git master 1306 tps

Result of pgbench -T 30000
sync-standbys-defined-rearrangement 1267 tps
current (or few days old) git master 1326 tps

So the patch eats 4,5% from git master's syncrep performance in my
setup. Don't know how to measure it better than that.

--
Yeb Havinga
http://www.mgrid.net/
Mastering Medical Data