| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Daniel Farina <daniel(at)heroku(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <ringerc(at)ringerc(dot)id(dot)au>, "Harold A(dot) Giménez" <harold(dot)gimenez(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |
| Date: | 2012-07-18 05:56:05 |
| Message-ID: | 17623.1342590965@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 07/17/2012 06:56 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Furthermore, I would say that any performance testing done since then,
>> if it wasn't looking at purely read-only scenarios, isn't worth the
>> electrons it's written on. In particular, any performance gain that
>> anybody might have attributed to the checkpointer splitup is very
>> probably hogwash.
> There hasn't been any performance testing that suggested the
> checkpointer splitup was justified. The stuff I did showed it being
> flat out negative for a subset of pgbench oriented cases, which didn't
> seem real-world enough to disprove it as the right thing to do though.
Just to clarify, I'm not saying that this means we should revert the
checkpointer split. What I *am* worried about is that we may have been
hacking other things on the basis of faulty performance tests.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-18 06:00:43 | Re: Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |
| Previous Message | Craig Ringer | 2012-07-18 04:57:53 | Re: Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-18 06:00:43 | Re: Re: Checkpointer split has broken things dramatically (was Re: DELETE vs TRUNCATE explanation) |
| Previous Message | Claudio Freire | 2012-07-18 05:38:32 | Re: Linux memory zone reclaim |