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

Testing strlcpy ()

From: "Strong, David" <david(dot)strong(at)unisys(dot)com>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Testing strlcpy ()
Date: 2006-09-29 17:06:08
Message-ID: B6419AF36AC8524082E1BC17DA2506E802579E26@USMV-EXCH2.na.uis.unisys.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
We've completed some tests comparing Postgres 8.2beta1 (beta1) and Postgres 8.2beta1 with strlcpy () (strlcpy).
 
First and foremost, the patch seems to be stable - we have not run into any issues with it.
 
After a database reload, there is an 11% difference between strlcpy and beta1 - strlcpy (107 TPS) performing ~11% better than beta1 (96 TPS). This seems to be consistent over a number of runs. Originally, we had only seen 3% difference here.
 
After 8 (or so) runs, the difference between the two versions disappears and both versions produce ~250 TPS. Both versions, over time, spend more and more time in LWLockAcquire. 
 
David

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: David FetterDate: 2006-09-29 17:06:31
Subject: Re: Nulls, arrays, records, IS NULL, IS DISTINCT FROM
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2006-09-29 16:56:40
Subject: Re: Win32 hard crash problem

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