Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress

From: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com
Cc: amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, david(at)pgmasters(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru
Subject: Re: Fix checkpoint skip logic on idle systems by tracking LSN progress
Date: 2016-11-21 04:31:02
Message-ID: 20161121.133102.152321709.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thank you very much for the testing on the nice machine.

At Fri, 18 Nov 2016 20:35:43 -0800, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in <CAB7nPqRa=igQMCx+FxbfwJ0TzhLU2tE+YOng7qAvZ+1NPm-FOw(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com>
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Okay, I have done some performance tests with this patch and found that it doesn't have any noticeable impact which is good. Details of performance tests is below:
> > Machine configuration:
> > 2 sockets, 28 cores (56 including Hyper-Threading)
> > RAM = 64GB
> > Data directory is configured on the magnetic disk and WAL on SSD.
>
> Nice spec!

This spec seems enough to see the performance of this patch.

> > The conclusion from my tests is that this patch is okay as far as performance is concerned.
>
> Thank you a lot for doing those additional tests!

So, all my original concern were cleared. The last one is
resetting by a checkpointer restart.. I'd like to remove that if
Andres agrees.

regards,

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ashutosh Bapat 2016-11-21 04:49:37 Re: Tuple count used while costing MergeAppend and that for an append rel
Previous Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2016-11-21 04:23:49 Re: Document how to set up TAP tests for Perl 5.8.8