From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: BufferAccessStrategy for bulk insert |
Date: | 2008-11-01 17:38:38 |
Message-ID: | 1225561118.3971.677.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 13:23 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Can you test whether using the buffer access strategy is a win or a
> > loss? Most of that gain is probably coming from the reduction in
> > pinning.
>
> --PATCHED--
> Time: 13869.724 ms (median)
> --PATCHED with BAS disabled--
> Time: 14460.432 ms (median with outlier removed)
That seems a conclusive argument in favour. Small additional performance
gain. plus generally beneficial behaviour for concurrent loads.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-11-01 17:44:34 | Re: pgsql: Allow SQL-language functions to return the output of an |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2008-11-01 17:23:12 | Re: BufferAccessStrategy for bulk insert |