| From: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | 2.4 v/s 2.6 again. |
| Date: | 2003-08-29 16:29:14 |
| Message-ID: | 200308292159.14095.shridhar_daithankar@persistent.co.in |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Hi all,
I compared 2.6 with elevator=deadline. It did bring some improvement in
performance. But still it does not beat 2.4.
Attached are three files for details.
I also ran a simple insert benchmark to insert a million record in a simple
table with a small int and a varchar(30).
Here are the results
2.6 deadline
1K/xact 299sec
10K/xact 277 sec
100K/xact 271 sec
2.6 AS
1K/xact 262sec
10K/xact Not done
100K/xact 257 sec
2.6 AS
1K/xact 252sec
10K/xact 243 sec
100K/xact 246 sec
It seems that I noted a test result wrongly. I need to do it again.
Overall 2.6 needs some real IO improvements. Of course it could do better on
multiway machine.
I guess there is no point bothering this with kernel hackers. They know this
stuff already, right.
Looking forward to next release of kernel and hope it improves things...
Shridhar
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| pgbench.7.4CVSHEAD.2.6.0-test4 | text/plain | 2.4 KB |
| pgbench.7.4CVSHEAD.2.6.0-test4.deadline | text/plain | 1.3 KB |
| pgbench.7.4CVSHEAD.24.20 | text/plain | 2.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | William Yu | 2003-08-29 16:33:51 | Re: Hardware recommendations to scale to silly load |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-08-29 16:18:35 | Re: PL/pgSQL functions - text / varchar - havy performance |