| From: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: basic pgbench runs with various performance-related patches |
| Date: | 2012-01-24 06:59:57 |
| Message-ID: | CAEYLb_VxFQGM2acVmBabaMpWNt6CP8jRDo0nRtXoVM48OLHSdg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 24 January 2012 06:26, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
>> ** pgbench, permanent tables, scale factor 100, 300 s **
>> 1 group-commit-2012-01-21 614.425851 -10.4%
>> 8 group-commit-2012-01-21 4705.129896 +6.3%
>> 16 group-commit-2012-01-21 7962.131701 +2.0%
>> 24 group-commit-2012-01-21 13074.939290 -1.5%
>> 32 group-commit-2012-01-21 12458.962510 +4.5%
>> 80 group-commit-2012-01-21 12907.062908 +2.8%
>
> Interesting. Comparing with this:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-01/msg00804.php
> you achieved very small enhancement. Do you think of any reason which
> makes the difference?
Presumably this system has a battery-backed cache, whereas my numbers
were obtained on my laptop.
--
Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Weimer | 2012-01-24 07:57:21 | Re: Page Checksums |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2012-01-24 06:26:15 | Re: basic pgbench runs with various performance-related patches |