Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2
Date: 2006-06-23 16:31:51
Message-ID: 16445.1151080311@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Average of 5 runs, for the first two cases, on the x86 machine that
> shows high overhead in gettimeofday.

> I used only 30000 SELECT 1 queries instead of 100k.

> 30000 SELECT 1;
> HEAD 8.1
> no overhead 21.9 23.1
> stats_command_string=1 22.4 36.6

> BEGIN; 30000 SELECT 1; COMMIT;
> HEAD 8.1
> no overhead 19.1 20.3
> stats_command_string=1 19.4 30.3

> It can be observed that HEAD in the no overhead case is actually faster
> than 8.1 on this machine.

That's more or less what I would have hoped to find, because we're
always finding ways to squeeze out bits of overhead here and there.
I wonder why your results are different from what I got on my older
machine? I'll have to break out oprofile again and try to see what's
happening there.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-06-23 16:48:00 Re: Anyone still care about Cygwin? (was Re: [CORE] GPL Source and Copyright Questions)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-06-23 16:28:16 Re: Planning without reason.

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2006-06-24 17:00:50 Win32 VC++ build update patch
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-06-23 13:23:58 Re: Overhead for stats_command_string et al, take 2